TL 210 
.B3 


f.* A- 




OH® 


\V 



c ^ A * 

°, * 

. V^s * 

0 Or *£* 9 

4 G ^ ° 



4 ^> < 4 * *#•»•*’' A t$> 

\j * * * 9 » o ,<y # * • * - < ^ < 

/ <*Mfc •*&* W ‘ 

<Z> V/ ♦ * ** A <> ‘ 9 *r r 

’%*°o ^yj^.% / 

**. ’bf ”W : 

5 0^ ^ 

% t V" ^ * 

r 


*r c b »?^r .o' * * 

/ f* ®* O. J.V 4 L/w + \> 







p VV * 
r _ * 0 ^*, * 

'•V <V'o,o v 

A 'Wh'* ^ ^ *- 

)p ®w%|w * A°?p 
%< v o v Js&AF * «/ o> • 

V * feT^y v •* &,r rl* * ■■*>**// [y^«y > 

<^ -?.?* «Cr V *^T* A 
• * (V . 0 » « * -<Jr , 

%»,* ’v C *a 5 $SW“-, v> * 

g»- "W 

K>* 



A ^ <* **«• »• .G 1 

•V " y\-- % ^ , o* . 

* -o / ”W *v 




%. 

* <i t r O *- ' f /j^l/"' ,v i T T ‘ < ^j. « a r O t 

$* 4 '" 1# f° 4 '‘>w ° 9 ^ 

***- a 0 \L^Lf* v ♦ c\ 





; : 
| Q <^i. * 




- 

•» <X V - 

* &, *>..« v 1 

cr o °" * ♦ *6 *y 



9 * A -o o J ^ %. A) ; \ V' 

V n ’ * «* .^) v .# ** ^ A A » ♦ o ^(-n »* * / 

*^ Va - *«& • ^ ^ ♦. ^ " 


A A. 

v . ♦* ^ ». 


A <+ 'OM’ 

'• ° A *>^^- ^ 

*. '^•o 4 

* »°’V • 

* „0 "V '.''W* «.(' cv 

•"■ - vT °^. * 

AV »Ain*r* 'f V n r * °* c>» 

^ .*/a&s*'. ^ ** .^vw. ^ 





’*’ A 0 > ' 

-0 X ,’■••. <? 



o JT> 

V>> 0 > *w 




***' <r 



* & ^ * 



. 0 ^ 6 fl ' * ♦ ^b A V . i' • „ *$> 


; I 

* <y *h> °* 

v 'oA* -G 1 

V /.- 

< 7 * 0 ^ 

« ^-[jPKJONW o A *-^C» *" ^ 

4 _^ cy *• 

% °"° V^ .'*o -% 

Q. ^•• > " ^ ^ ->§4‘' ^ 

^ V< v * 

V ^ WMW* <fc ^ , 

4 V +~ 


o » f 



pv 


/I l ♦ ”T<W/- a 

V v °^. *'•’• f° 

V v f T • °* c* t0 v « 

‘ ^ ^ A * 

• - 

‘ • .• *>% • 

• V & • 



'o. *"T r .T*' A 

««•♦ ^o A> 

„|*P > . t 



<?> * ® If <» 9 ^ 




e » t 



v • * # • 

• % y * /7/1 

r v <0 

: ^% \mm: 

* ,.-r V. ■ 


'» ^ ’V -* 

♦ rt a # i 

A 0 %, '■ 

Ap^ .VVl'* *"> 

?• A* ♦*/5fl%'. <5 

v/'_ a 7 _ ^r=Sllili l!fc~7 _ 


VS 


o 

; /°- 

■ y u ,,..,/% - * v ° ’. <^‘ ...\* 



❖ °. 



,'• ^ A^ *', 






^ r ®.** <G 


a : 

* « 6 r » 

4 pr ^ - 


■: .* 
^ <y & » 


■9 

_ ,* y <<- - 

* ^ ^Av^ir % 

*, ,J o v ^ o v 

: j.°v. > «5 ^ 

A y °* 0 

»:*y- <> 


A v 'bf A 'O#* 1 

o /iv^sPi • ^y_ A *• *p, 4 

. o> . * ** o v 



^4 


> ^ ^o * 




" fP >, A ' 4 

A C ^ " » »»‘ A 

l> *^s55^v^ o .i 

o /x\^s^lL<Tt •* «y *># 


V . 

K CL 


■ * y ,.. v *-'•’y,... v ^ ao ; *v ** 

.-* V ^ A * 0 A> , ’ R*S*. C A. .-iP k *> 




♦ r(\\ A,° ^ tv ♦ ( 


* v °» 

**7VT‘ A 

=>o A > c' 


' 0 V \ '7^* <A O ■ 0- *7^ 

A , *.„ ^ °«° <y a <u * * >'* v * oT^ 

v V 1 v * i • °- c\ ,<y ,*••% y> 

* %<* av ^rfUggA, 0 cfi 

K/ ■* AA '-0j>. * ') 

• £s A < <L V ri* «* 

<> *° * * * A°^ 4 


VV v* 

v* ' J ^v -* ° aV«*> * » • A vr 

./ % ^fp,* A ** % “!w* / ' 

0 o ♦; A , * A <?. -o • »* ,6 V 

6 0 " * -t ^b Ay • v ' * ♦ <£» rO^ , o " 0 

«*<^irC* ° A ♦w?4’ ^ c° AjWfo 

rv *n S ^SN^I 1^L « vV- /TV * A^ulZ/y^yP ^ ^ 4 a * \\xv\l 

■ * o > * < 

J. 0 ^ - 

>> ~ Ot. J 


^<SV- - V 
S A •* <L k -> 

\ % * <0^ 


<.CT *?A2 *<. ^C 

Vj * _X^VT\. - <* I 


A 



i> A . 
VcV .*. 


>W 


6 tP 





i. by 

%‘*V V‘^/ ■ 

* °- c>. «0^ »^ ^ f t <* o, 

■•• ^ ^ ^ .wv. ^ 

■ •* <V '■>.•* A cr V 'Tf^T* A <* '»..* Jp 

A 4 ,• A;^ % ,<y «•!•♦. ^o 4,^ .* 1 "-* A, ,6^ « 

■%_ A 1 ^ *.^^W-' i°' 7 + ^ °-o * 

V'^\/ %^rA ^ "v^*'./ V‘‘*<’ 

> %/ * y * <»^ «<r » l!oL'-v v % o T * °> o 

**■ ** A, r rt * *r A x*^ <■ <" » - *■ o *=» * -A 

*• «• a . rv tA> 


a " o 




AVASQ/AVZ ^ U» , 

y. <?'-«$> ‘M^** A s ^ 

A 0^ o ♦/7 vT* A <> 'o.^ .Cr 

C° •rf$5t? 1 I% o A* y*/r?7^' % C° .“ 

•'»•. -o/ :illl^*< *^0* •» 


v- A ."V '. 

° cy * 


v N 


y * 


% **<’ 


• ^ ^ * 
; vv •, 


«? °.o. • OMlLlQ * a^ 

,<y ^ 

’ A, ■'.’. »* A 

0*9 A ’’ 

G ^ ^ ^ O 
♦ -X'VVtV ^ ^ 



av^> \wm* 3^ 

<V 'o*^ <o v \d A 

* t ' * -» ^ 0 V c 0 " * * ^b A^ 

* •* < Cl • - <* «'i .1 V 



A ^ 


<u ^ 



























Fads About 

The 



BY 

EUGENE BALLOU 

'l 





Copyrighted, 1913 
By 

EUGENE BALLOU 



THE TOLEDO LEGAL NEWS CO. 
TOLEDO, OHIO 


■ft /' 0-Q 

©CLA3578 I 8 



INTRODUCTION. 


This edition in hand book form has been pre¬ 
pared for those interested in the operation of the 
Silent Knight Motor, showing the elements of con¬ 
struction and giving a detailed explanation of all its 
most important features. Every endeavor has been 
exerted to make the book comprehensive, while yet 
not unduly technical. It will serve as a reference as 
well as being instructive to those interested in the op¬ 
eration of this truly wonderful motor. It is not the 
intention of the writer to praise or belittle the makers 
or any type of engine but the claims set forth in this 
book are to more fully uphold my contention of the 
merits of this motor. 



Sectional View of Silent-Knight Four-Cylinder £%Cotor 


1 Cylinder 

2 Water-jacketed cylinder head 

3 Spark plug 

4 Inner sleeve 

5 Outer sleeve 

6-7.Port openings in sleeves 
8. Priming cup 
9 Oiling grooves in sleeves 
10 Port opening in cylinder 

11. Connecting rod operating 
outer sleeve 

12 Connecting rod operating 
inner sleeve 


13. .Fly wheel 

14. Oil trough adjusting lever 

connected to throttle 

15. Lower part of crank case, 

containing oil pump, 
strainer and piping 

16. Oil scoop 

17 Adjustable oil troughs 
18. Crank shaft 
19 Crank shaft bearing 
‘20. Starting clutch 
‘21. Silent chain drive for mag¬ 
neto shaft 


- - Silent chain driving sprocket 
for electric generator (on 
4-cylinder models) 

‘23. Silent chain drive for eccen¬ 
tric shaft 

24. Eccentric shaft 

25. Connecting rod 

26. Bearing for eccentric shaft 

27. Piston 

28. Piston rings 

29 Cylinder-head ring (junk 
ring) 














FACTS ABOUT 

THE “SILENT KNIGHT” MOTOR. 

By Eugene Ballou 

I T is surprising* at this late date in the development 
of The “Silent Knight” Motor, considering all 
that has been said in lecture, advertisement and 
.demonstration, the number of people one finds in 
traveling about this country, and Europe as well, 
where the sleeve valve motor was first taken up and 
put on a commercial basis, that do not understand its 
simple construction and principles of operation. 

Therefore the object of this book is to set forth 
in clear, non-technical language a treatise that will 
be understood by the most unmechanical minded. 

The invention of the silent sliding sleeve valve is 
undoubtedly the most wonderful stride in advance 

J 

and improvement since the advent of the internal 
combustion engine. Owing to its simplicity and ab¬ 
sence of small parts and its remarkable reliability 
under the severest tests, this motor has a very bright 
future. The facts and data herein compiled have been 
collected by myself, and I am very much indebted to 
Mr. C. Y. Knight, the inventor of the sleeve valve 
motor, The Daimler Motor Car Co. and The F. B. 
Stearns Co. for the privileges of making observations 
while at their plants. Through the courtesies of The 
Knight and Kilbourn Patents Co. I have been able to 
obtain much reliable and authentic data, records, and 
evidence to substantiate my arguments. 


Mr. Knight realized the faults and short coinings 
of the poppet valve type motor in the early days, 
namely, pitting of valves with the result of lost power 
and inefficiency, noisy operation, variation in spring 
tension and numerous other disadvantages which the 
old motor possesses. After many unsuccessful at¬ 
tempts to silence the tappets or commonly called 
valve jumpers, Mr. Knight began experiment along 
altogether different lines; that is, to depart from the 
beaten path and produce something altogether differ¬ 
ent, and the result was his first single sleeve engine, 
early in 1902. This led to the present type of efficient 
double sleeve motor. The advantage of having two 
sleeves is evident as when the ports open the sleeves 
are traveling in opposite directions and vice versa, so 
giving a very fast opening and closing, whereas witn 
the single sleeve there would be but a single move¬ 
ment. The Silent Knight engine does not differ from 
other motors only in the valve mechanism. The dif¬ 
ferent cycles of operation, of which there are four, 
namely, induction, compression, combustion and ex¬ 
haust, take place in the same manner as any four 
cycle engine. The changes in the Knight which con¬ 
stitute the great improvement over existing types, 
are these silent, tremorless, sliding sleeves working 
away without care or attention. They make no noise, 
for they strike nothing. They merely slide up and 
down in perfect lubrication, and silently. Take in 
your hand two smooth pieces of metal, oil them well, 
then slide them one upon the other—this is the simple, 
noiseless, vibrationless, silent action of the sleeves in 
the Silent Knight engine. 

Two concentric cylinders or sleeves encircle the 
piston and form the outer walls of a combustion cham- 


6 



ber. These sleeves are operated from an eccentric 
shaft or in other words, a small crank shaft, by means 
of short connecting rods attached to the lower end of 
the sleeves. These sleeves are made from a good 
grade of grey iron, the same as that employed in cyl¬ 
inder casting. 



The Movements of the Sleeves. 

It will be observed that the inner sleeve is mov¬ 
ing upwards, and the outer sleeve downwards, and the 
two sleeve ports are rapidly coming into line with the 
inlet port of the cylinder. The piston is, of course, 
descending. 



7 















































































































































The inlet ports in the sleeves have come fully 
into line with the cylinder port, and now there is a 
clear opening for the gas to be drawn in. 1 he piston 
is halfway down on its stroke. 



As the piston reaches the bottom of its travel 
and begins to return on its compression stroke, the 
sleeves have moved upwards so that the port in the 
inner sleeve is no longer in communication with the 
cylinder. The exhaust port is also closed, and there¬ 
fore the gas is compressed by the rising of the piston. 



Both of the ports in the inner sleeve are securely 
sealed by the pressure of the broad junk ring situated 


8 





















































































































































at the bottom of the cylinder head. In this way the 
explosion expends its full energy in driving the piston 
downward. 



When the piston has descended about three-quar¬ 
ters down on the power stroke, the downward move¬ 
ment of the sleeves brings the inner ports from behind 
the junk ring in the cylinder head, and as the exhaust 
port in the outer sleeve is already in line with the cyl¬ 
inder exhaust port, the waste gases can escape from 
the cylinder. 



(6) Exhaust Full Open. 


9 
















































































































































The exhaust ports in the sleeves soon come fully 
into line with the cylinder exhaust port, and before 
the piston begins to ascend on its exhaust stroke the 
major portion of the burnt gases has already escaped 
from the cylinder. When the piston reaches the top 
-of the stroke, the outer sleeve has moved down so far 
that the exhaust port is closed and the inlet is again 
opened, as in figure i. 

The previous drawings give a lair idea of the 
operation of opening and closing the ports for the 
different functions. 

These sleeves are machined to exactly the same 
thickness and ground inside and out. Slots are cut 
near the upper ends, and these form the ports for the 
gas passages. These slots or valve openings are 
larger than is possible with any other style of valve, 
so that greater power is attained through the induc¬ 
tion of a fuller charge of gas, as also, through a more 
complete scavenging of the cylinder chamber after 
explosion. 

You will note that the cylinder contains ports on 
each side which form a passage to the inlet and ex¬ 
haust manifolds. In the bottom of the cylinder head 
is a large packing ring. This packing ring is of ortho¬ 
dox piston ring construction, except for its greater 
width; owing to this width it bridges the ports with¬ 
out catching on the edges. It has been named the 
junk ring and its use is most important as it seals 
the ports against leakage during explosion. Another 
nicety of this design is the detachable heads to the 
cylinders, consequently the combustion chamber can 
k>e machined and polished so there is no possibility of 
pre-ignition owing to carbon or small projections of 
metal. It is owing to this construction that it is pos- 


io 


INNER 

SLEEVE 


OUTER 

SLEEVE 


I NTAKE 
PORT S 



Fitting the engine cylinder closely, one within the other,, 
with a film of oil between, are these two sliding sleeves, and 
within the inner one slides the piston. Each sleeve has two slots 
in it, one on each side. When slit Y in the outer sleeve comes, 
opposite slot X in the inner sleeve, and opposite the intake port 
C, a charge of gas is drawn into the cylinder. After the explo¬ 
sion has taken place, the sliding of the sleeves brings the slot B 
in the inner sleeve opposite slot A in the outer sleeve, and right 
opposite the exhaust port E, forcing the burnt gas out through 
the exhaust manifold. 


i r 



























































































































sible to have every combustion chamber of exactly 
the same size, which contributes to smoother running. 
It is a well-known fact, conceded by engineers, that a 
motor with valves in the head develops more power 
than a T head that has its valves set in offset pockets 
at the side of the engine. It is possible to combine 
this ideal construction without the disadvantages of 
long push rods and the valves operating against high 
pressures and the fierce heat of combustion. 

The gas enters the cylinder on the suction stroke, 
when the piston is going down, and the inlet slots in 
the inner sleeve are in register with the inlet slots in 
the outer sleeve; this always happens midway of the 
inlet port to the cylinder. On the return stroke of the 
piston, which is the compression stroke, both sleeves 
move up so that the inlet slots slide by the edge of the 
junk ring, thus sealing the port. The inner sleeve 
continues to go up and does not start down until the 
piston has started on the next, the explosion stroke. 

Before the piston reaches the bottom of this 
stroke the exhaust slot in the inner sleeve begins to 
open, passing the edge of the junk ring (previous to 
this the outer sleeve has already moved down), thus 
allowing the gases to pass through its slot and escape 
into the exhaust port of the cylinder and out to the 
muffler. The piston on the return stroke continues 
to force the burnt gases out the exhaust port until the 
slot in the outer sleeve moves down past the port in 
the cylinder, thus cutting off this passage. 

Just before this cut-off takes place, the slots on 
the opposite (the inlet) side have begun to open to 
start again over the four cycles just mentioned. 

Please note that up to the time the exhaust gases 
are allowed to escape, both the inlet and the exhaust 


12 


slots of the inner sleeve are still up and sealed by the 
junk ring'. 1 his sealing of the cylinder chamber con¬ 
tinues throughout the whole working stroke and pre¬ 
vents any g'ases from leaking out of the cylinder and 
thereby lessening the explosive pressure, which would 
mean loss of power. 

1 he advantage of the Knight type of engine over 
the ordinary type is simplicity, economy, power and 
silence. There are fewer parts to this engine over 
the poppet type—I should say about one-third less. 
The parts are very easy to machine. 

The Knight engine runs at a very high efficiency, 
as 20 per cent less heat is carried off by the water cir¬ 
culation. This 20 per cent, instead of being lost as 
wasteful heat, is utilized as useful energy. The com¬ 
bustion of the gas is directly over the piston, while the 
point of ignition is in the center of the compressed 
gas. 

Another reason for the abnormal power devel¬ 
oped by this motor is the fact that the walls of the 
sleeves which the piston travels upon are exactly the 
same thickness and do not distort or expand un¬ 
equally with heat and let the explosive gases past the 
rings. As every one knows it is a physical impossi¬ 
bility to set a core so straight that a cylinder wall will 
be absolutely the same thickness from top to bottom 
without machining the outer diameter. As this is 
out of the question it must be left in that condition 
and naturally distorts unequally under heat. If this 
amounts to but a thousandth or two it is enough to 
permit the gases to blow by the rings with a conse¬ 
quent loss of power. As I said before this is all quite 
impossible with the Knight. 


13 



The Knight engine may not develop much more 
power than any other engine at low speeds, but 'at 
high speeds the Knight Motor is far in advance. 

Silence is one of the inherent features in the 
Knight type motor without unduly muffling it. Since 
the advent of the sleeve motor, I dare say a thousand 
different types of valveless engines have been pat¬ 
ented including the rotary valve, from which en¬ 
gineers hoped so much, but in every instance they 
were failures, for none of them showed the efficiency 
of the poppet, let alone an increase from 25 to 50% 
as in the case of the Knight. The poppet manufac¬ 
turers have succeeded in silencing their motors by 
fitting cover plates over the valve stems and lighter 
springs, as well as altering the shape of the cams, so 
as to get a gradual opening. All this serves to quiet 
the motor at slow speeds, but at high speeds there is 
very little difference. All this tends to make a slug¬ 
gish motor as the valves will naturally open slower 
with the altered cam profile and it has been proven be¬ 
yond doubt that poppet valves do not always close at 
excessive speeds with heavy springs so what good are 
lighter ones ? 

Another feature which makes for added quiet¬ 
ness is the use of silent chains for driving the eccen¬ 
tric shaft as well as magneto and pump instead of 
gearing. The pull being constant the use of the silent 
chain is permissible. The ordinary type of spur gear 
timing wheels could be used to even better advantage 
on a Knight than on a poppet valve engine where the 
pull is intermittent owing to the use of cams and high 
tension springs, but the humming of the gears would/ 
be very much out of place on a motor naturally so 
quiet. The noise on the Knight is confined to a few 


'4 


rotating parts, such loose bearings, fan and mag¬ 
neto. At high speed the noise is no more noticeable. 
This is where the “silence’’ on the Knight scores. 

When driving a Knight engined car, one gets the 
impression of being pulled along by some unseen 
force; the absence of noise at high speed is indeed 
pleasing. It happened to be my good fortune to drive 
two Knight engined cars a distance of nearly 25,000 
miles over all conditions of roads and it was indeed a 
pleasure, this mileage being covered without the 
slightest trouble with the sleeves. 



15 













LUBRICATION. 

Do the Sleeves Properly Lubricate? 

There has been enough said about the lubrication 
of this engine to fill a book of a thousand pages. Skep¬ 
tical people and competitors have often said that the 
sleeves would sieze up, that it is impossible to lubri¬ 
cate them, that carbon finds its way between the 
sleeves and scores them that the ports burn and a 
hunared and one other things that ought to happen 
to it. As a matter of fact nothing of the sort does 
happen. The truth of the matter is that the early 
Daimler engines smoked excessively—that would in¬ 
dicate too much oil—so they abandoned the direct oil 
leads to the tops of the sleeves, and the motors still 
had too much oil, so the level was lowered until the 
proper quantity was supplied. As it is impossible to 
fit baffel plates beneath the cylinders, the Kni gin 
motors run with a much lower oil level than most 
motors. The automatic splash system is used almost 
without exception. Oil is pumped into troughs which 
lie beneath the crank shaft, one under each connect¬ 
ing rod. Small scoops attached to the connecting 
rods dip into the oil and splash the oil to all parts of 
the motor. These troughs are connected to the 
throttle lever and when the engine is accelerated the 
troughs are raised, supplying more oil and less when 
throttle is closed. This is very simple and economical, 
the oiling varying not only with the power, but also 
with the speed of the engine. It has been known for 
engines of this type to average four and five hundred 
miles to a gallon of oil over a distance of 10,000 miles, 
the motor being 4%" bore by 5J/g" stroke. In one in¬ 
stance a 6-cylinder Knight motor, 4x 5^2, was 


































run idle 9J4 hours at 2100 revolutions per minute, and 
with the motor still running at this speed the oil was 
drained off to see what would happen to the motor. 
The connecting rod bearings went first and threw 
some of the rods out through the crank case, but upon 
dismantling the motor the sleeves were found to be 
in perfect condition as far as lubrication was con¬ 
cerned, for owing to great surface and the many oil 
grooves it is possible to retain oil for a considerable 
period. On one occasion I saw a Knight engined car 
driven a mile and a half with no oil in the crank case. 

If you will examine a sleeve of a Knight you will 
notice these oil grooves cut right around them, also 
that the piston has been drilled with small holes to 
return excessive oil to the base again. 

The most difficult surface to lubricate is a sliding 
surface subjected to intense heat, combined with high 
pressure. Two flat surfaces working together strong¬ 
ly, and when conditions are such that the viscosity of 
the oil may be preserved to a reasonable extent, resist 
the squeezing of the oil from between them. But in¬ 
crease this pressure, heat the surfaces to a point where 
the oil thins up like water, and it soon finds its way to 
the outer edges as a result of the reciprocating move¬ 
ments essential to the functioning of the valve. In 
rotating surfaces, particularly when the rotating 
action is supplemented by the pumping action of the 
stopping and starting of the reciprocating parts, the 
oil which is squeezed out at one impulse through high 
pressure could be automatically replenished by the 
succeeding shock of the return movement of the 
reciprocating masses, such is the action present in 
the operation of the flat slide valve, and the ten¬ 
dency is wholly to squeeze the oil out. In the con- 


18 


centric sleeve valve of the “Knight” motor, these 
conditions are almost wholly eliminated since the 
sleeve valve wholly encircles the piston and forms the 
side walls of the explosion chamber, these valve seats 
are not subjected to high pressures, as the explosions 
against the walls of the valve are entirely balanced. 



Cylinder Casting, with Cylinder Head Sectioned, showing Top 

of Combustion Chamber. 

The cylindrical walls, as a result of their form, are not 
in the least affected as to position by the explosion. 
In other words, were it possible one could put their 
fingers between the walls of the sleeves and suffer no 
ill effects from the explosion itself, the only side 
thrust or pressure at the firing point being caused by 
the angularity of the connecting rod. This pressure 
figures out at only 20 lbs. to the square inch. 


19 




ILLUSTRATIONS SHOWING POSITION OF PORTS DURING CYCLE OF OPERATIONS. 



Induction. Compression. Firing. Exhaust. 























Another unfounded fault is that of criticising' the 
operation of the sleeve from one side, some saying 
that it would not wear uniformly owing to the tip¬ 
ping action. 

hor illustration, draw an imaginary line from the 
point of operation to the opposite side at the top, and 
it will readily be seen that the angularity of operation 
is practically nil. At any rate the weight of the piston 
working inside and the long surface in contact with 
the stationary cylinder wall would be enough to cor¬ 
rect the slight angularity. 

Vacuum Distributes Oil. 

There is always from four to seven pounds to the 
scpiare inch of vacuum at the intake ports which ex¬ 
tend nearly a third of the way around the cylinder. 
Any oil that clings to the base of the sleeves is ex¬ 
posed to this vacuum. Every time the intake ports 
open oil is gradually drawn up the sleeves and then 
distributed around the entire surface of the sleeve by 
the grooves and capillary attraction. That this suc¬ 
tion is present and does draw the oil from the base be¬ 
tween the sleeves and cylinder walls is most easily 
proven by placing a motor on a bench and running it 
for half an hour from power through a belt with a 
plate bolted over the induction port. It will be found 
upon removing the plate that the port will be full of 
oil. This proves conclusively that the motor is self- 
lubricating. 

Mr. Knight said in one of his lectures: “If I had 
tried to invent an automatic lubricating system in¬ 
stead of a silent engine it would appear as if I had 
succeeded very well indeed.” 


21 



22 



































SLEEVES MOVE WITH PISTON WHEN 
UNDER PRESSURE. 

With regard to the operation of the sleeves I de¬ 
sire to call your attention to a most important feature 
of the motor. At the time the explosion occurs in the 
cylinder, both piston and the sleeves are at the top of 
the stroke. They start downward simultaneously 
and move together until the piston has reached the 
bottom of the stroke and the pressure in the cylinder 
has been practically reduced to atmospheric. Now, 
it will be seen that instead of the sleeve requiring 
power from the eccentric shaft to drive it downward, 
the friction of the piston against its walls would have 
done so had no other means been provided. During 
the explosion we have the maximum side thrust of the 
piston stroke. 

While the piston returns, the sleeve continues 
downward, and the two elements are driven by their 
mechanism in opposite directions. But upon this 
stroke there is no lateral pressure upon the sleeve, be¬ 
cause the piston is only dispelling the exhaust gases. 
Therefore there is no resistance to the travel of the 
sleeve. 

W h en the piston reaches the top, the sleeves 
have reached the bottom of their stroke, and they 
start moving in opposite directions. But as this is 
the suction stroke, again there is no friction of conse¬ 
quence. There being no pressure upon the piston it 
now starts on the return stroke, the compression 
stroke, and the sleeve continues upward. Here there 
is the lateral pressure of the piston which meets the 
resistance of the compression gases, and the sleeves 
are again under pressure. But here again the friction 
•.side pressure aids them in their upward movement. 


23 



Sectional View of Daimler Engine. 


2 4 



































































































































1 his sectional view of the motor will show the 
easy method of retiming the sleeves in relation to the 
piston, hirst, for illustration, take number one cyl¬ 
inder and turn the piston to the top dead center with 
the crank up as in cut. Then take hold of eccentric 
shaft gear and turn same until the inner sleeve reaches 
its highest point of travel at top dead center, as in cut. 
Then put on silent chain and the motor will be prop¬ 
erly timed. These sleeves, or valves as they might be 
called, require no attention or adjustment whatever 
once they are properly timed when the engine is as¬ 
sembled. 

BURNING OF THE PORTS. 

One of the first false impressions under which a 
great many labored was the burning of the ports in 
the sleeve valve. It might suffice to state that they 
do not, but inasmuch as the cause of their immunity 

j 

from damage from heat is easily explained, I shall 
dwell to some extent upon this feature. 

The ports in the sleeves are sealed by overlap¬ 
ping of their opening with the junk ring. Under¬ 
neath the junk ring there is placed a second, or spring 
ring for the purpose of insuring perfect contact with 
the interior of the inner sleeve. Both rings are split 
like a piston ring. Above them are two or three or¬ 
dinary piston rings to guard against leakage of gas 
that might pass the junk ring. These rings are all set 
in the water cooled detachable head that extends 
down into the cylinder. The water reaches within a 
fraction of an inch of the bottom of the inside of the 
head. The cylinder surrounding the sleeves and head 
is also waterjacketed so that the sleeves reciprocate 
between water cooled walls, and the sleeves, junk 
ring and slots are cooled upon both sides. At the time 


25 



Mr. C. Y. Knight. 



26 



of the explosion the slots of the inner sleeve are cen¬ 
tral with the junk ring. Hence, from the time of the 
greatest heat until the temperature in the explosion 
chamber is reduced to at least half, the slots through 
which the exhaust gases pass are not exposed to heat 
at all. 1 herefore, their lips and surfaces are not only 
immune from the fierce heat of combustion, but the 
entire section of the sleeve carrying them is pushed 
up after every explosion and rubbed against the water 
cooled surfaces, thus serving to prevent the accumu¬ 
lation of heat at this important point. None of the 
valve mechanism is ever brought in contact with the 
heat, as are poppet valves, whose heads are always 
subjected to the highest temperature generated in the 
explosion chamber, and which heat reaches almost 
the melting point of steel. 

W ith regard to the wear of the sleeves. The 
sleeves present an enormous surface for taking the 
bearing pressures. This pressure amounts to 20 
pounds per square inch, against the piston pressure 
of 80 pounds or more per square inch. 

For instance, take a motor with a stroke of 5^2 in. 
and the travel of the piston at crank shaft speed based 
on a thousand revolutions a minute will travel ap¬ 
proximately 916 ft. per minute. Now take the sleeves 
with a stroke of i l /% inches, and traveling half the 
speed of the crank shaft, based on a thousand revolu¬ 
tions of the crank shaft per minute, will travel 93 ft. 
or nearly a tenth as far and as fast. 

A foreign taxicab company noted the wear be¬ 
tween piston and cylinder on 50 of their cars and the 
average was five-thousandths of an inch for 50,000 
miles. Now then by dividing five-thousandths by ten, 
which will give the wear on the sleeves, it will readily 


27 


be seen that the wear in 50,000 miles is practically 
nothing as after a few hundred miles they take on a 
glass-like finish. Several instances have occurred 
where sleeves have been run in a motor for 100,000 
miles with no evidences of wear after the first few 
hundred miles. As I said before, after the fitted sur¬ 
faces have become smooth the interior of the inner 
sleeve where the rings and piston works, of course, 
will show wear just the same as the stationary wall of 
a poppet valve cylinder. By fitting a new inner sleeve 
it eliminates the necessity of regrinding the old cyl¬ 
inder and fitting new pistons and rings. The power 
absorbed in driving a set of sleeves in a six-cylinder 
of 4^4 x 5*4 was found to be only two horse power 
when the engine was developing 75 horse power. 

Compare this absorption of power with that re¬ 
quired to operate poppet valves. The springs neces¬ 
sary to seat the poppet valves of a motor developing 
power equivalent to that given off from a 4% x 5/4 
sleeve valve type, require at least 100 pounds tension. 
Not only this, but on the exhaust side the cam shaft 
is compelled to lift against an explosion pressure 
which amounts to at least 150 pounds upon the valve 
head at the end of the firing stroke, when the pressure 
of the explosion is somewhere about 50 pounds to the 
inch at the time the exhaust valve should open. Thus 
we will see that fully 250 pounds pressure is required 
to lift the exhaust and 150 to raise the intake valves, 
at every second revolution, in the case of poppet 
valves. 

In the Knight engine the inertia of the inner 
sleeve, when the motor is turning 1,200 revolutions 
per minute is something like 60 pounds while that of 
the outer sleeve is less than 50. Taking the inner 


28 


slee\e as the cue subject to the greatest stresses be¬ 
cause of its greater weight, there is 96 pounds of 
weight to raise; 90 pounds of friction to overcome at 
one point only, 60 pounds of inertia to counteract at 
the outer and inner ends of the stroke; a total of only 
I 5° pounds as against 250, in the case of the poppet 
valve. 

COOLING. 

A\ ill the motor cool? is another question often 
asked, and might be answered by repeating the fact 
that over 26,500 of these motors are now in the hands 
of the general public, doing the most drastic service in 
cars operating upon European roads with stretches 
hundreds of miles in extent where unrestricted speed 
is possible, as well as on American roads where road 
conditions are much worse. Not only this, but offi¬ 
cial tests are available which will leave no doubt in 
the mind of the disinterested seeker of the truth as 
to the. perfect cooling of this type. Complete water 
jacketing encircles the cylinders, cylinder heads, cir¬ 
culation areas enclosing the spark plugs, and also the 
gas ways, so that a uniform heat is maintained the 
entire length of the piston travel The water pas¬ 
sages are all large, and the piping simple. Those eager 
to criticize the construction raise the point that be¬ 
tween piston and water cooled cylinder wall of this 
motor there are three films of oil as against one in 
the poppet type, and that oil, even in these very 
films, is a most inefficient conductor of heat. Here 
again exist peculiar conditions of which he has not 
taken account. 

Were it a fact that these sleeves while under heat 
remain stationary, I would concede the correctness 


29 


of the theory. What do you do with a quantity of 
liquid in a vessel when you desire to drive the heat 
from it? Naturally you stir it in order that each par¬ 
ticle shall gradually be brought into contact with 
either the open air or against the sides of the walls 
which are so exposed. A vessel of hot fat left undis¬ 
turbed will congeal at the edges of the vessel and re¬ 
main liquid at the center. So with the oil films be¬ 
tween the sleeves. If they are left undisturbed they 
will retain their heat to a greater or less extent. But 
if the patricles are rolled and tumbled about, by be¬ 
ing rubbed between the sleeve surfaces, there is no 
chance for any heat remaining away from contact 
with the metal slides. Each reciprocation changes the 
position of these heat particles and serves to remove 
them from local heat spots which otherwise might 
cause a section of the surface to become too hot for 
proper lubrication. The average person may readily 
understand that the transfer of heat from one surface 
to another is tremendously facilitated by rubbing 
them together. 

But, if the Knight motor possessed only one fea¬ 
ture in which it differed from all other motors it would 
forever be famous. This one feature is its valve tim¬ 
ing, which is positive and mechanical. It cannot be 
deranged by ignorance, neglect, or wear. In fact, the 
valve timing in the Knight motor can never become 
deranged because there is a definite opening and clos¬ 
ing of the intake and exhaust ports no matter at what 
motor speeds the car may be operating. Two years 
ago one of the leading American engineers experi¬ 
mented with poppet valves and discovered that fre¬ 
quently at the high speeds the exhaust valves did not 
seat, there not being sufficient time because of the 


30 


inability of the valve spring to close the valve in the 
intei\ al before a cam returned to open it again. With 
such a condition it is certain that the most powerful 
mixture was not obtained. Said the engineer: “It is 
a well-known fact that with poppet valves the tension 
of the springs on the exhaust side varies after five or 
six weeks use and consequently the accuracy of open¬ 
ing and closing is interfered with. In fact it has been 
proven that they do not close at all at certain speeds. 
Carbon g'ets on the valve seating and also prevents 
proper closing of the valve, with the result that the 
compression is interfered with and the face of the 
valve injured.” 

With the sliding sleeve valve as on the Knight 
such failure of operation cannot be, because no mat¬ 
ter how fast the motor is operating there is a definite 
opening and closing for both intake and exhaust 
valves. With the positively-operating valves it is a 
fact that they will not operate unless they are right, 
and when they are right they go on indefinitely with¬ 
out trouble, and in fact go better after a certain 
amount of usage, and these motors gain instead of 
losing power as numerous tests have shown. This is 
a feature to be greatly appreciated by operators or 
owners. The four-cylinder Knight engine with its 
few parts and balancing features is able to hold its 
own against the best six-cylinder poppet valve en¬ 
gine. Its smooth running and soft pull on the car, to¬ 
gether with its rapid acceleration with the throttle 
open, make an ideal motive power. Of course, this 
ideal is enhanced in its application to a six-cylinder 
engine. 

Numerous tests have been made for power on 
the Knight engine, the most interesting of these are 

o o 7 


3 1 


those of long duration. Some engines have run con¬ 
tinuously 400 hours developing their maximum horse 
power and maintaining it throughout the whole run. 
This is a feat practically impossible for a poppet en¬ 
gine to duplicate. 

The tests made by the Royal Automobile Club 
of Great Britain on the Knight engines some time ago 
are well known, and the fact that the challenge they 
made to poppet valve manufacturers for the duplica¬ 
tion of this test was never taken up, proves that the 
test was rather difficult. 

The Panhard people of France, before taking out 
a license for this type of engine made tests of the 
Knight engine in their laboratories. They not only ran 
the engine 150 hours continuously at maximum horse 
power, but ran the test 400 hours. Their entire test¬ 
ing of these motors extended continuously over a 
period of 15 months. They must have been satisfied 
with the performance of this engine or they would not 
have placed the cars on the market. 

The Mercedes concern in Germany made similar 
tests, the results of which were never given out, but 
inasmuch as they are now marketing the Mercedes 
cars with the Knight engine, it must be taken for 
granted that the tests were satisfactory. 

When the Daimler Company first allowed a 
Knight motor to be installed in their factory, to ob¬ 
serve its performances, they ran it continually every 
day for six months. They made no comment, but 
simply kept it under the daily eye of their entire en¬ 
gineering force. At the end of six months, they said 
“they were interested.” But, before they would ex¬ 
press themselves further as to their opinion of this 
motor, they wanted to construct a half dozen motors 


32 


and subject them to the same severe six months’ test¬ 
ing- that this one motor had received. At the end of 
three months, however, the performances of these 
motors were so marked, that the Daimler people 
were ready to conclude their arrangements with Mr. 
Knight. 

Mr. Knight's experience with the Panhard Com¬ 
pany was even more exasperating, after what his mo¬ 
tors had actually accomplished for the Daimler Com¬ 
pany. T he Panhard people ran one of these Knight 
motors for 15 months. Every day for 400 days, this 
motor was submitted to continual testing. They tried 
to kill it in every way possible. When they found that 
it withstood all the rough treatment they had given 
it, they told Mr. Knight they wanted it. 

I have endeavored here to make clear the reasons 
why the sleeve valve type of motor has proven a prac¬ 
tical success. I take it for granted that every one 
fully appreciates the advantages of an explosion 
chamber free from pockets or vestibules, the merit of 
liberal and direct and unobstructed port openings, the 
absence of unenclosed working parts and the advan¬ 
tage of a valve system which compels the positive 
opening and closing of ports which cannot get out of 
synchronism, and also of the general cleanliness and 
symmetry of design possible with this construction, 
as well as the absence of any surfaces except the pis¬ 
ton against which the explosion can act. In every 
automobile factory where experiments on the Knight 
w^ere conducted, the engineers making the tests, have 
always stated that the Knight engine does show re-- 
suits and, in the words of a well-known American 
automobile engineer, “The sliding sleeve valve engine 
has made good.” In viewing this motor from every 

O o ~ 


33 


angle and analyzing it thoroughly, then comparing it 
point for point, it would be impossible to arrive at any 
other conclusion. 

The accessibility of this motor should appeal to 
every one interested from an economical point of 

THE TRIUMPH OF THE SLEEVE VALVE. 



“Poppet” Acknowledges the Superiority of the Sleeve. 

view, both in time and labor to make an overhaul. 
Toi instance, on all cars it is advisable to clean the 
deposit of burnt oil out of the cylinders at regular in¬ 
tervals. To do this, it is usually necessary to have the 
engine completely dismantled before the cylinders 
can be removed. 


34 


















1 lie method of fitting detachable cylinder heads 
renders the operation much more simple. After dis¬ 
connecting the sparking plug wires, loosen the nuts 
which connect the water pipes on each side of the cyl¬ 
inder head, and remove the six nuts which hold the 
head down on the cylinder. The head will then be 
finite fiee and may be lifted straig'ht off. If, however, 
the head is tight in place, it is convenient to leave a 
couple of the holding down nuts loosely on their studs 
and then to turn the starting handle gently. When 
the piston rises on the compression stroke the pres¬ 
sure will move the head off its seat, so that it will be 
quite free when the nuts have been removed. 

When replacing the detachable heads after thev 
have been removed for any reason care must be taken 
to properly enter the junk ring and the rings above it 
by forcing the split ends of the rings together into 
their grooves, just the same as replacing a piston in a 
cylinder. 

This operation is quite simple and requires a frac¬ 
tion of the time necessary on a poppet valve motor 
with the necessity of valve grinding, lifting heavy cyl¬ 
inder castings and dismantling everything, spoiling 
gaskets and disturbing the different piping and con¬ 
nections. No matter what in theory may be against 
the Knight principle, everything works out admirably 
in practice. 

The last 500 mile race at Indianapolis where a 
Knight engined car finished fifth is wonderful evi¬ 
dence of its staying qualities and sleeve valve regu¬ 
larity. The motor in question was of 25 H. P. with 
a bore and stroke of 3 15/16x5^8 inches and was 
capable of a speed of 85 miles per hour and made an 
average of 70 miles per hour for the entire 500 miles 


35 


without replenishing cooling water and the tempera¬ 
ture was 86° in the shade, this little motor defeating 
20 cars nearly all of greater horse power. It was the 
smallest car in the race and had been driven 9,000 
miles as a touring car and was borrowed from the 
owner for the race. 

The regularity of its running may be gathered 
from the fact that the difference in the average of 
each hundred miles for 300 miles being only a few 
seconds. While on the subject of reliability I might 
state that the London General Omnibus Co., which 
has 26 oo< motor omnibuses on the London streets, 
has been so thoroughly satisfied with the service given 
by 300 Knight engined buses which have been run¬ 
ning for twelve months past that they have decided 
to replace gradually all the poppet engines in their 
2600 buses with Knight engines. The buses in ques¬ 
tion are greatly favored by the public on account of 
their silence and smooth-running qualities, while the 
great power of acceleration enables the driver to pick 
his way through traffic to very best advantage, with 
the result that the Knight motor has now been se¬ 
lected as standard for future work. In view of the 
fact that the daily run of a London bus is no miles 
of very strenuous work, it must be admitted that the 
success achieved here is very notable indeed. 

The American Auto Club recently completed a 
test of a well-known poppet valve engine which re¬ 
calls and causes to stand out conspicuously in point 
of reliability and superior performance the test of 
four years ago of the Knight motor, officially ob¬ 
served by the Royal Auto Club of Great Britain. All 
of these important evidences and many more which 
I might enumerate go to show to what state of per- 


36 


fection and power this wonderful invention has been 
brought. However, it has never been seriously put 
forward by any responsible authority that the sleeve 
valve motor is capable of greater power or speed than 
any poppet valve motor of whatever design or type. 
The poppet valve motor may be, and is generally, 
built to suit the occasion. If great power and high 
speeds are desired, high compression, large valves, 
strong springs, and precipitous cams are employed. 
\ his high power and great speed produce an uncon¬ 
trollable, noisy and unreliable motor. The large 
val ves and their seats are very susceptible to warping; 
because of their large area and the increased heat of 
high compression they do not cool properly, and the 
strong springs necessary to seat them at high speeds 
soon weaken or actually pound the head of the valve 
out of shape. This spring action, seating with a force 
sometimes as great as 300 lbs. pressure, has the same 
effect when the valve is red-hot (as it becomes under 
hard work) as pounding the head in the center with a 
hammer, as the large head “gives 1 ' in the center where 
the spring is pulling through the stem, the clearance 
between valve tappet and cam decreases, the timing 
undergoes change, and adjustment is necessary to 
bring back the decreased power. To remedy this de¬ 
fect racing motors are often built with two exhaust 
valves to the cylinders, so they can be kept small and 
cool. 

In order to produce a quiet, reliable poppet valve 
motor, low compression, small- valves, weak springs, 
and a gradual opening cam are necessary on account 
of the difficulties enumerated above. With small 
valves and weak springs go decreased efficiency, both 
in the matter of power and fuel consumption. The 


37 


small valves do not admit sufficient gas to generate 
high pressures behind the piston, and the weak 
springs will not properly seat the valves at high 
speeds, but cause them to lag and foul the mixture by 
permitting the piston to draw back into the cylinder 
exhaust gases through the exhaust ports when the 
spring fails to close this port at the proper time. The 
powerful poppet valve motor requires a cam capable 
of opening the valves suddenly and wide, and the very 
nature of this operation prohibits quietness, because 
the opening must be more or less in shape of a ham¬ 
mer blow. Also poppet valves of large area require 
much more power to lift against the exhaust pressure 
at the end cf the power stroke, the weight required to 
be lifted by the cam increasing in proportion to the 
area of the valve head exposed to the gas pressures in 
the explosion chamber. 

When a poppet valve advocate talks power and 
efficiency his argument is invariably based upon that 
type of motor which is noisy and unreliable. When 
he talks smooth running and reliability, he seeks his 
evidence from the type of motor with small valves, 
weak springs, inefficient cam contour, and low com¬ 
pression, and the inexpert, knowing nothing of these 
differences, but believing one poppet valve motor to 
be the same as another, is deceived by race track per¬ 
formances of special engines into believing that he 
has its efficiency in the quieter type especially ^ de¬ 
signed for quietness and smooth running for touring- 
cars. The superiority of the sleeve engine over the 
poppet type lies in the fact that the efficiency and 
durability of the sleeve system is not affected by high 
pressures. 


38 


The sleeve valve is balanced against lateral pres¬ 
sure, and the explosion does not affect or shock it at 
any point. The ports are large, the inlet and outlet 
most effective for their area, and the action of the 
motor is not affected adversely by their increased 
size. Increase of compression up to the pre-ignition 
point is no disadvantage, because the explosive pres¬ 
sures developed are expended in useful work upon the 
piston, and the valves are no more difficult to open 
under high pressure than low, because they slide with¬ 
out resistance past their port openings, instead of be¬ 
ing made to lift against pressure. 

In the sleeve valve, therefore, it is possible to 
combine the advantages of both types of poppet valve 
motors. In the sleeve valve is combined the silence, 
endurance and reliability of the small poppet valves 
and low compression with the high efficiency of the 
high compression, large valves, powerful springs, and 
precipitous cams of the racing poppet valve motor, 
and the operator has in the one sleeve valve all the 
advantages of both types. A standard sleeve valve 
motor is capable, so far as efficiency is concerned, of 
delivering all the power of the racer with all the soft¬ 
ness and quietness of the inefficient poppet, and the 
operator has within his control a surplus of power 
which he can call into service when needed in emer- 
o-encies. Of course, with standard bodies, wind re- 
sistance, and weights of touring cars nobody expects 
extreme racing speeds upon country roads, but the 
power is there when required for acceleration and 
hill work, as thousands of users testify. 

The accompanying photographs are of two 
sleeves and a detachable head that came thiough the 
Royal Auto Club test of four years ago. I was for- 


39 



Two of the Sleeves After the Test—Both in Perfect Condition. 



Cylinder Head at Finish of Test—Note Absence of any Carbon 

Deposit. 


40 








tunate to be in London at the time they were on ex- 
hibition and had an opportunity of examining them. 
They were truly in perfect condition as the Club’s 
seals attached to each part will testify. 

It would probably not be out of place in conclu¬ 
sion to make a few comments upon the early discour¬ 
agements of the inventor and the eventual adoption 
of the motor. An English Daimler car fitted with one 
of these motors under the supervision of the Royal 
Automobile Club of Great Britain, won the Dewar 
trophy in March, 1909,—the result of the greatest 
engine test on record. Incidentally this trial estab¬ 
lished so high a precedent that no engine of the poppet 
valve type has ever equalled or surpassed this per¬ 
formance. Other well-known companies in all parts 
of the world have acknowledged the unquestioned 
supremacy of the sleeve valve engine. 

A STORY OF BURIED GENIUS. 

But back of the series of triumphs attending the 
sleeve valve motor is a story of many years of toil and 
discouragement, a story of buried genius, a story of 
a man who for years sought recognition for an inven¬ 
tion destined to revolutionize motor building. The 
story of that man—Charles Y. Knight of Chicago— 
reads like a romance of business fiction. Away back 
in 1896, when automobiles were just beginning to at¬ 
tract attention in this country, Mr. Knight brought 
forth a new type of motor radically different in many 
ways from the ordinary engine. He was laughed at 
by engineers and designers—at that time they were 
“too busy” to investigate. In those days manufac¬ 
turers were chiefly concerned in making their cars 






run—they had no time to experiment with new mo¬ 
tors. The questions of maximum efficiency, silence, 
high power and smooth operation were not vitally im¬ 
portant. Those were the days when the principal 
thing necessary was to make the car run—not how or 
why—but just keep it running. 

“But,” Mr. Knight would argue, “my motor is 
not only superior theoretically, but practically. Cars 
with my motors are running successfully today right 
here in Chicago." 

It made no difference—no one would pay any 
attention to the “Silent Knight.” “Just a freak,” was 
the almost universal comment. 

KNIGHT GOES ABROAD. 

Discouraged, but firm in the belief that ulti¬ 
mately the world would recognize the merits of his 
motor, Knight persisted. Finally, on the invitation 
of the English Daimler Company, Knight sailed for 
England in 1907. It was during this year that I had 
my first ride behind a Knight motor. The trip made 
w r as from London to Windsor and back a distance of 
forty miles. Since then I have been an enthusiastic 
supporter of the principle, for as crude as the motor 
w^as then, it was a revelation. 

At that time England and the continent were far 
ahead of this country in automobile manufacture. 
Even then, tests and experiments had become chiefly 
devoted to improving, refining and silencing the ma¬ 
chine—the one aim being “the quiet car.” 

Straight to the Daimler Company at Coventry 
went Knight—to the oldest manufacturer in Great 
Britain. Quietly the engineering staff listened to him 
and carefully watched the performance of his sleeve 


42 






valve motor. Comparison with their own highly cle- 
\ eloped and efficient motors showed an immense mar¬ 
gin in favor of the Knight type. 

For a year the experimental department tested 
and tried the new engine. Not only was the Daimler 
motor very efficient in itself, but the company was 
licensed under the German Mercedes patents and had 
access to all the developments worked out by that 
well-known firm, consequently they were loth to ad¬ 
mit the superiority of a new motor, but months of 
gruelling tests proved true all the claims made for the 
Knight Sleeve Valve Engine. 

Daimler adopted the Knight motor. Finally in 
1908, after combining the best points in design as 
practiced in their power plant with the Knight sleeve 
valve principle, the English manufacturers an¬ 
nounced to the world that they had adopted the new 
motor, convinced that it was far in advance of any 
other type of engine. So in England the invention 
was first publicly recognized. 

Then came the storm of criticism—a blast from 
many sources. “The new motor was only good in 
theory—it had not been proven—it was a freak. Why 
weren’t poppet valve engines good enough? Why 
hadn’t America recognized this engine?" And a hun¬ 
dred and one other criticisms. In short, Knight and 
the Daimler Company faced the same biting blasts ot 
denunciation and ignorance that was borne by Alex¬ 
ander, Graham, Bell, Morse, Prof. Langley and every 
other true ’discoverer and inventor. 

But service in the hands of the public soon proved 
the Knight motor. It more than fulfilled the claims 
made for it. But the critics, lacking any tangible 
proof of the claims made against the Knight motor. 


43 




but secure in the belief that it could not be as good 
as represented, they demanded a test—an official 
trial by the Royal Automobile Club, the highest tech¬ 
nical authority on motoring in Great Britain, and a 
body composed of engineers for whom designers the 
world over have profound respect. It seemed im¬ 
possible for this motor to “make good”—that it must 
prove false. 

The Daimler people at first did not care one whit 
whether their motors were tried by the R. A. C. or 
not ; their sales had never been so good in all the his¬ 
tory of the company; their stock was advancing by 
leaps and bounds. Still in a way they were glad of 
an opportunity to prove to the world just how good 
the new motor really was. 

Daimler Accepts the Challenge. 

The longer they thought over the idea of a test 
the more willing they were to enter it, but not on the 
terms prescribed by the Club. “No,” said the Daim¬ 
ler people. “If we submit these engines to test, we 
will make it worth while and impose conditions more 
stringent than any ever heard of in the history of 
motoring. We will prove our motors conclusively, 
and we will set a standard that nobody else will at¬ 
tempt to equal.” 

They handed in such a revision of the specifica¬ 
tions and conditions that no one could believe that 
they were in earnest. “You surely don’t want us to 
submit your new motors to these rules?” said the 
Royal Automobile Club in effect. “Why, it would be 
suicide for you—no motor ever made could stand up 
under such a test—we won't do it.” “Yes, you will,” 
came the grim response from the makers. “You will 


44 





try our motors in this way or we will not hesitate to 
publish the fact that the Royal Automobile Club re¬ 
fuses to put our motors to such tests.” 

The result of that trial is history. Not only was 
it never attempted before, but no poppet valve motor 
has ever attained anywhere near the results of that 
test. The following is a reproduction of the two cer¬ 
tificates issued by the Royal Automobile Club, printed 
in their entirety. Notwithstanding the severity of 
this test there was no perceptible wear noticeable on 
any of the fitted surfaces. 



— 


45 



m 

o 

w 

-P 

HH 

PQ 

o 

2 

o 

H 

ID 

< 

hP 

< 

> 

O 


o 

'4—* 

c/3 

03 

r 

rt 


a\ 

o 

o 


£ < 

° j 

t: ft 


Pm 

M—i 

o 

03 

-4—> 

oj 

03 


03 

U 


<u 

f—* 

• ^"H 

bjo 

^ G 

od W 


CO 


Vi 

o> 


Q 

> 

03 

£ 


*"s3 


b/3 

03 


C/) 

-M3 

-4-3 

• T— 1 

bio 

’41 

a3 

Vi 

41 

gC 


bJO 

O 

O 

Vi 

^H 

r -1 


03 


r” 1 

♦-H 

PP 


r- 1 

u 

C/3 


*53 


was si 

u 

w 

O 

< 

pp 

C/3 

Gj 

03 

03 

41 

C/3 

03 

m 

-4—> 

c<3 
0 , 

hies on 

G 

*—< 

03 

C"| 

c/3 

41 

03 

oj 

r— I 


o 

co GC 

i-i 03 

■4—* 

CU *£ 
-Mi G 
o *o 

Si I—I 

41 

c/3 


. G 


41 

CO 

CM 

f—< 

Gf- 

O 

On 



O 

r-« 

i— i 

00 


41 


N * r ' 

HH 

• 

r— 1 


>4 


bJO 

41 

hH 

r* 

d 

G 

i/G 

1—1 

(D 

t 

Oj 

Ch 


4-4 

03 

«-i 

0 


s ' 




0 

03 

r) 

03 

03* 

U 

c3 

• 

O 

2 

f— 1 

OX) 

Vi 

0 

41 


G O 

W Jg 


Vi 

03 


V- 

03 


Cb rt 

Q G 


03 

£ 

rt 

4-> 

o3 


o 


03 

r '» 


O 

4-> 

C/3 

C/3 


O 

o 

C/3 

i— 


01 

CO 


<u 


rt 


C/3 

03 


<13 


o _ 

S M 


03 Vi 

c*', O 


c/3 

ro ( 

Vi 

03 

r— 1 

b/) 




03 


bX C/3 


O 

o 

o 

of 

>4—( 

o 


rt 

» 

O 

>41 

r- 1 

T 

03 

o 

03 


03 


G -o O 


03 


C/3 

V- 

C/3 

C/3 

03 


>> 

o 


C/3 

03 

4—» 

bx 


£ 

o 

o 

>41 

03 


Vi 

O 


03 

4-4 

C/3 

03 


<03 

n 


r 

'"c/3 

03 

r* 

b/) 

c 1 

03 

03 


CC 

03 

C/3 

o 

f— 1 

s 

• ^H 

bx 

Vh 

03 

£ 

O 

CM 

i 

03 

C0 

O 

r -1 

03 


o3 rt 


03 

rv 


03 

( 03 

O 

O 

o 


03 

ns 


03 

03 

C/3 


O 

4-» 

C/3 

p 

03 


CO 


rO 


rO 

13 

4-1 

o3 


u 


o 

LO 

4—> 

o3 

4—< 

ns 

oT 

-M3 

03 

ns 


03 

C/3 

4-4 

03 


O = 

CM 

O 03 

Vi 1 

n , 


03 

c/3 

o3 

03 

Vi 

03 


03 

n\ 

o3 

CO 

Vi 

03 

£ 

o 

I 

03 

C/3 


03 G 


O 

03 


o3 

V- 

03 


03 

4-1 

Vi 

03 

4-> 

Oj 

£ 

03 

r-j 

+-> 

rt 

r—■ 

f-H 


>4 ^ 

G 03 

•—< pH 

* 1 

4-1 -Cl 

G 

O 'TC 

r— 

41 o3 

* S 

•“ M—< 
2 £ 
So r 

r— 1 ,_H 

03 OC 
(— 1 

jy s 

M -3 ^ 

« 

4i Oj 

C/3 03 

<13 . 

-*-> bx 


03 O 

^ -4—» 

rt 


a a3 

41 

G c/3 

O i 

■ — TO 

41 

03 G 


o 

03 


o 

rv 


03 


H 


. ns 

01 .G -1 


G co 


w 

03 

aJ 

41 

C/3 


03 

n 


ri 

C/3 


03 

o 


lands Track, this distance to be completed in not more than sixty hours of running time. 

q That upon completion of the track test, the engine shall he again placed on the bench, and 
run for five hours under the same conditions as the previous bench test referred to in paragraphs i, 


I he C ertificate shall show, inter alia—■ 

( i.) A chart giving the horse-power readings to be taken not less than once every hour dur¬ 
ing the endurance test at the declared speed. 

(2.) A record of repairs or adjustments, if any. The following, however, while they may 


v£> 


<v <v 

DG GS 


co 

<v 


co 


bJO 


O 

o 


o 

Do 


d 

r - * 

• r-H 

bjO 

r -1 

d 

d 


a 

CL> 


O 

o. 


O 

D 

<-> .. 

to 

G <D 

► »—I -J » 

CD 

n 


CD 

■"G 

Do 

O 

o 

<D 


D 


Do 

o 


<D 

r-j 

+-> 

T J 

r- 1 

03 

’’O 

(D 

o 

r —1 
D -1 

bjo 


<D 

JG 

bjo 

G 

• H 

G 

u 

<D 

> 

O 

bjo 

co 

r-» 
«—< 

O 


AD 

G 

O 

o 

cj 


<D 


Do 

o 

L+o 

D 


D 

G 

C/3 

GG 

O 

O 

b£ 


A JH 


CD 

o. 


D 

Do 


D 

Oh 


• — 1 

D 

t 

1 

£ 


a; 



co 

Do 

• *-H 



D 

4-> 

a 3 

b/) 

• r-H 

CO 

Cj 

c3 


-4—> 

D 

CD 

a; 

O 

'-G 

D 


CJ 

« 1 . 

• r-H 

-4—» 

Do 

4-» 

D 

Do 

D 

X 

Do 

V-H 

<v 

Q 

O 

Cj 

*Tj 


D 

co 

r 1 
♦—( 


<—• 

CO 

r— 1 



D 



-4-> 

r-< 

c 

D 

D 

<v 

r-* 



D 

C/3 

CO 


CO O 


D 

-D-> 


b/} . 

■I E 

CD D 

* 1 \ 

CD CO 

-t-< A 
G co ^ 

O t " , i 

^ <D 

p c\: u 

c ^ 2 

■A J W pq 


CO r- 
D ^ 

b/) 00 

lb d 
.c; ,r > 




co 

0 —> 

u 

a 

Co 

D 


O 

G 

D 

v-Q 

D 

oG 


Do 

D 

£ 

o 

Gh 

i 

D 

CO 


Do 

D 

CG 


.2 

0-> 

CD 

r- 

r - 1 

G 

co 

c— 

OO 

o 

D 

*D 

G 

1 

D 

H 


o 

+0 

cj 


X 

D 


CO 

• r-H 

r— 1 
*—» 

c-G 

D 


Co 


£ 

O 


rt 

D 

> 


rt 

b/) 

* *-h 

> 

b/) 

•N 

D 


Do 

D 

CD 

CO 

G 

O 


o 

> 

D 

u 

O 

O 

hi 


CO 

cj 

£ 


a 

o 

+-> 

D 


a 

f —; . 

CO 5-1 


D 


O 


Do 

o 


D 
D 

Do ^ 

bjo xi 

D qj 
' G Do 
D 

D o-> 


cj 

CO 

a 

£ 

Do 

D 

> 

o 

p 

I 

D 

co 

Do 

o 


D D 


ro 


D 

D 

CG 

co 

D 


D 

r— 

£ 

£> 

jg 

D 


Co 


Do 

D 

£> 

D 

'"C 

D 

a 

Do 

c 

o 

D 

Do 


Cj 


D 

Cj 

-l-> 

D 

Do 

D 

£ 

CO 

b/D 

_ G 

’’C 

cj 

D 


O 

G 


cj 

• f-H 

Do 

H 

D 


O 

r"» 

bjo 

G 

O 

Do 


D 

D 


D 

CO 

q 

O 

co 

cj 

£ 

cl 

So 

G 

D 


D 

r - 1 

h 


hour. These records are shown on the chart accompanying this Certificate. 


m 

03 

H 

a 

C 

03 

PQ 


CO 

u 

• rH 


u 

03 

Ph 


O 

U 


i 

03 

CO 

o 


^ 03 

C/3 o 


<0/ 


ro 

P 

VO 


Z Ov 

.0 W 

P4 ^ 


aj 

4 - > 

5- . 
03 

p 

4—> 

O 


J— 1 ■ o 
a/ j_ 
' O Cj 
C G3 


rt 


CO 


C/3 

C/3 


Cu 

4-> 

C/3 




in 

03 

p 

p 







LO 

03 


03 

4-J 


Petrol 

1 

P 

5 

u 

sumec 


Galls 

P 

VO 

5-i 

oj 

<4-4 

4-J 

o 

CO 

r— 

03 

P 

4-* 

o ■ 

"5 

03 

h*-J 


03 

b/D 

Cj 

1 

03 

C/3 

l—i 

03 

p 

03 

P 


ro 

>* 
r- 1 

cd 

.2 

4-» 

D 

4-J 

P 

CJ 

4—t 

oC 

CO 


03 

o 


O 


•oT 


r~* 

p 

03 

Cj 

J** 


< 

X 

0 

p 

03 

03 

'V 


to 

o 

03 

03 

03 

P 

<L) 

5—i 





J 



03 

r- 1 

p 






• 



C/3 

4-J 

4-J 

CJ 

b/D 

C/3 

Oj 



P 

a; 



Oj 

CJ 

M—« 

O 

P 

p 

03 

’C 

P 

< 

K*** 

p 

CTj 

03 

Oj 

5- 

c r 

4—» 

P 

T-* 

p 

r v 

o 

4-J 



C/3 

03 

b/D 

V0 

6 

O 

5-. 

<4—1 

4—» 

yj 

P 

P 

<v 

P 

o 

PQ 

5- 

o 

03 

p 
r— l 

4-J 

C/3 

4-> 

0 

CD 

P 1 

On 

P 

Oj 

p. 

Q 

03 

C/3 

z> 

s > 

P 

o 

Oj 

r 

Oj 

<V 

P 

4-* 

«-P 

P 

<D 

CD 

CD 

p 

P 

P 

<u 

P 

i§ 


O 

4—> 

co 

o 

Oj 

O 

p 

p 

03 

» 

03 

H 

4—> 

o 

03 

Oj 

<U 


•bjc 

r< 




'-f-( 

O 

CD 

CD 

r 

c 

P 



f T 'l 

H-* 



03 

t 

01 


vj 


O 


co 

o 


5-. 

5- 




o3 

5-i 

G 

Q 


C/3 VO 


03 

£ 

03 

u 

<v 


r~s f 
Cj 

b/D 

o3 

5-i 

rf 


03 b/D 

p P 

ac • <J 

r- 1 ^ 

S C/3 

V Z 


V 03 

’G r- Q, 

m .g ^ 


0 /D • 

co G ^ 
O.T +2 
O H! 03 
^ 3 G 
OQ u w 
c CP 


03 


£ 

P 

p 

_o 

4—> 

o3 

5-. 


03 

P 



4-J 

* ^ 

4-J 

CD 

Oj 

p 


03 

4—/ 

10 o 

03 

4J 


G 


03 


03 

o 

> 

03 


4-J 

0 

--- 

—H 

P 

p 

4—3 

0j 

03 

oj 

^4^ 

P 



O 

tC 

«—i 

03 



5- 

13 

i—>i 


£ 


£ 


03 


Oj 

co 


b/D 


cj 

CO 

03 


03 


<-t—i .03 

° t2 

P *—* 

5 

4-> 4-4 

03 •- 

^ £ 


_o 

03 

* . 
♦—« 

P 

Q 


L-H- CO 

O 03 

r_ 

r -1 


P 

LO 

g' tu 

Lh 

o 

03 

# o 

4-J 


P 

z o 

P 

*-H 

oj 

P 

P 

Q 03 

CO 

PS 

> 

5-4 

03 


LO 

o 

p 

4-J 


CO 

Q 

0 


oo 

■*r 


touring body- 














































Part II.—Running Test. 


c n 

<v 


O 


G cd 

C ° 
O u 

f-H V 
r H o 


On 

4 

ro 


cu ~ 

O .O . 

G •— C/3 

cd ^ 03 

4—• r rzr 
w w ^ 

4 4-1 ^ 

—1 03 

/—S 


I\ 

lO 

o ! 

Cd 


IX 

On 

iO 

ro 


00 

On 


03 

o £ 

Oh £ 
- 4-4 — 1 
03 c/3 

P_| - 

U 


03 

C/3 

’— ; cd 
cd ^ 

O o 

z; 


c/3 

o! ^ I. 
^ Cd 03 

° U bjo 


03 

C/3 

C/3 


03 O 

bjo ^ 

cd M cd 


r 


03 


cd 


ro 

On 


iO 

IX 

LO 


. LO LO LO LO 

^ co ! o 1 o oo 


-O o 00 
d - co 


03 

b/) 

cd 

03 


CM 


03 

bjo 

cd 

03 

s 


O 

03 


03 

bjo 


X 

03 


1-0 

o 

ro 

ON 


CC | O 

ro> M 


LO Cd 


cd 

£ 


03 

i> 

O 

U 


jx 

CJ 

cd 

Oh 


C/3 

o 

cd 

2 

o 

o 

u 


IX 
i v-< ; 


03 


O 


x z 

03 

O 03 

”■ bn 

O M 


u 

cd 


* 

03 


03 

Oh 

03 


03 

cd 


C/3 

M 

r- 1 

cd 

s 

o 

o 

CQ 


c/3 

03 


c/3 

-4—1 

<-4—4 

o 

Px 

r - 

*—< 

05 


u. 

v-> 

o 


oh 

03 


• —i c/3 

P 03 
» ' | ^ 

LO £ 

O M 

ro T 

o> <n 

1-4-H 

o 


03 

s 


C/3 

03 


03 


03 

c— 1 

r 


03 

03 


LO C/3 

On 03 

lo b/) 
cd 

Oh 

03 


Cd 

03 ' 

> 

O 

<-4-H 

03 

Oh 

03 


C/3 

cd 


cd 

cd 

bjo 

r- 1 

>• 

So 

c/3 


03 

03 

cd 

o 

03 

* 

C/3 


03 

So 

fH 

03 

03 


*X 

Oh 


03 


03 

bjo 

cd 

03 


cd 

- 4 ^ 

O 

4-> 

03 


Cd O 

4 u 


c/3 

0 - 


10 


03 

-4-» 

03 

Oh 


o 

03 


o 

-4—* 

b/j 


03 

0-1 

c 

o 


03 

03 

o 

Oh 


C/3 

M 

b /3 


03 

j2} 

c/3 

-4—1 

Oh 

cd 

rv 


Q\ 

•d 















































































Part III. Final Bench Test. 


o 

O 


I 

c"* <U 

I S 2 

V o 


<v 

co r^ 


u 

<v 


O 

X 


S c 

'M O 


<D 


co 


<D 

1 


40 


boO 

<V 

u 

<D 

to 

cd 

CO 

<v 

'"O 


Vo 

U 

> 



<D 

O 

> 

0 


> 

X 

0 

0 , 

<J 

<D 

lO 




'OJO % 

B £ 

!—i 


<v 

L4 CO 


<v 


X 

4-» 

o 


<V 
r ^ 

r*i 

O 


cd ^ *-> _ 
Q PQ <L> co 

J ^ s - 

o 


<D 


co 


4-1 • --> 

_* <L> ^ 

rC CO -O . 

a cd << 

' 5P CD 


OJO 

f* 

«-H 


b/) 


CO 

o 


O 

4-> 

in . 


u 

u 

CD 


• 

4—1 

.2 

4-0 

cd 

Do 

K 

3 

-4-> 

♦-H 

Q 

Vo 

CD 

(D 

Ph 



OL • 
co £ 

cvr PP 
o n 

in 5 £ 

s CL, 


r* 

o 

-4—> 
Oj 

U 

Q 

Vo 

<D 

r*i 


£ 


o 

• *“H 
+-> 
C3 
u. 

Q 


CO 


O CD 

H 


—< ir, 


^ On 
.5 On 
Oh “? 


CO LO 

2 d <N 

O n 


co 


lO 


£ 




to 


to 


co 

rX 

u 

X 

E 

<u 

ft 

»s 

CO 

<D 

bJD 

n3 

3 


<d 

4—» 
L+-1 

o 

£>4 

cd 


<d 

Cd 

<D 

o 


co 

Co 

£ 


Co 

cd 

£ 

<D 

r\ 


<D 

CD 

u 

<u 

Cl 


f— 4 

•—< 

Co 


<D 


Co 

<—■ 

CO 

oo 

>4 

QD 

4-0 

<D 

rv 


O 

o 

co 

cd 

£ 

<d 


O/D 

r- 1 

53 

<d 


<d 


CO 

4-» 

s- 

cd 

o. 


<L» 

CD 

Cd 


cd 

4-> 

CO 

I— 1 

X 

bJO 

cd 

bJO 

r - * 

Q 

O 

Vo 

CO 


Co 

<d 

"53 

b^ 

rj 

Co 


O L2 


o 

0 , 

o 

> 


b*"4 

rN 


CO 

<u 

CD 

cd 

M—t 

S-H 

b 

■ CO 

4o 

<v 

4-> 

4-J 

f 4 L 


O 

>4-1 

<D 

<d 

£ 

CO 

t— 1 

i 

O 

4-> 

CO 

rv 


cd 

co 

Vo 

<D 


b*-. 

cd 

<u 

r— 

r . 


<D 

co 

53 

cd 

o 

CO 

cd 

> 


u 

X 

Cu 

b*^ 

r -1 

cd 


cd 

<L> 


CD 

r> 


U 

x 

<L> 
► — 


o 

buo 


<D 


o 

CO 

CO 

<u 

K. 

cd 

k.. 

<v 


CO 

0 

’> 

CO 

jo 

4-0 

Uo 


0 

O 


<D 

<D 


C"< 

h 



(Signed) J- W. ORDE, Secretary. FRANCIS OF TECK, Chairman. 

(Date) yth April, 1909. ^ MERVYN O’GORMAN, 

119 Piccadilly, Eondon, W. Chairman of Technical Committee. 






























05 


:£ 05 


i 

C/3 


I 

V 


ON 

o 

ON 


c/5 

05 


Ctf 




£ 


05 

o 



00 


01 


o 


4—1 

bJO 


G 

• H 

+-> 

UP 

+-» 

HH 

ctf 



r— 1 

T3 

t__ 

• 

rt 

o 

t—H 


< . 

ctf . 05 

a « .a 

bJO 


O *-0 

*■£ 00 

05 ei 

Ph « 

M—< 

O 

05 

4 —> 
wW 

05 

'-C 

4—> 

u 

05 

U 


w 

u 

05 


*> * 

» 

c” 1 

§ u 


C/5 

Ctf 


C/5 

o 


I——( 

05 


05 

C/5 


C/5 


C* 1 

05 

05 

r> 

C/5 


> £ 


O 

ro 


C_5 

05 


05 C 
G 

1 1 • T—I 

0 P 


o o 
a *—< 
a/ 

C/5 

5- ’— 

O ctf 


u. 

4-> 

C/5 


C/5 

Q 

»-i 

05 

b/} 


Tt - 

o 

On 


>' 

On 


05 


ctf 
o. 


O P 

•“ o 
« u 

•a s 

G O 


M \n 
ro qj r~| 

i—i 4-> ■“ H 

«-*—i 05 co 

O Gb ^ 

+-* M 

O to 

’£ | i 

v—l * 

W ,—I 

VW . ,_ 

• 05 C 


c/5 

05 

4 -» 

05 


bjo 

r-> 

’C 

r— 5 

o 

u 

O 

o 

m 


05 

y 

05 


8 

’S (-H 

r\ — 
■— * 

C_5 

C/5 

4-» C/5 

J- 05 

rtf ro 

rv _ 


ctf 

4—> 
> 
C/5 


O 

o 

o 

of 

«-•—i 

o 


05 


bJD 


05 

r—< 

05 
r ^ 

05 


C/5 

G< 

ctf 

1 -H 

b/) 

ctf 

1-4 

Ctf 

<-l ■ 


05 

>» CJ 


w 

i-c 

05 


§ 

J-H 

05 


ctf ctf 

Q P 


05 

s 

Q 

05 


o 

w 

05 


■-< U 
^ 05 

o G, 


05 

05 


. Ctf 

r— 1 

C/) 

o 


o 

o 

o 


05 


05 
4—i 

ctf 


O 

o 

S-* 


05 

C/5 

Ctf 


Ctf 

C/1 

4 -> 

05 

I— 1 

05 

r-* 

4-4 

«4—i 

o 

05 


ctf 

4-> 

6 

4-4 

£ 

05 

r- 1 

5o 

05 

05 


C/5 

05 


05 

r-* 

05 

Q 

05 


ctf 

4 -* 

C/5 

l S-/ 1 

ctf 

t 

n 


v 

ctf 

q 

ctf 
05 * 

biQ 


O 

C/5 


4-» 

X 

£ 

r - 1 

Ctf 

r~* 

4-* 

05 

t 

o 




05 

C/5 

•— 

V 

<D 

U. 


Cu 

Oj 

P 

“New 

4-» 

CO 

U 

rf) 

05 

4-* 

05 

Q 

05 

b/) 

Uh 

-4—» 

05 

05 

O 

<v 

4—> 

o3 

* , 

o 

4-i 

M—i 

0 

r- 1 

PP 

r-^ 

rt 

4—* 



*4* J 

C/5 

Gb 

05 

J5 


r—■ 

O 

cj 

V 

V v 

05 

ctf 





4—* 


4-* 

cj 

p-* 


C/5 

O 

o 

4-* 

WVJ 

c 

4—» 

0 J 

III 




^>4 

/*S 


C/5 

05 


05 

r-< 

’So 

05 


05 

C/5 


C/5 


0- C/5 


05 


05 


05 

u 

b/j 

f— 1 

V 

05 

ro 

i 

05 

o 

4-> 

• ^ 

4-4 

4-4 

o3 

4-4 

4-4 

o3 

HH 

>■> 

CO 

Ih 

O 

C/1 

Q 

r— 

r-" 


r - ^ 



^ ——l 




C/D 

O 

M— < 



w' 

(D 

*—i 

r 

w 1 

r~| 

HH 

oi 


r- 1 


4-4 



4-> 



U 






o 

«4— < 



*—. 

r“* 


l—i 

05 

4-» 

Ctf 

05 


o 

o> 


o 


05 

"ctf 

4-> 

C/5 


05 

O 


Ctf 

C/5 


05 

4-4 

05 


o 

05 

05 

n 


05 

05 

r - * 

Ctf 

4-> 

C/1 

W 

C/5 


^05 

05 

05 

Ctf 


ctf 

b£ 

ctf 

05 


Ctf 

t-* 

'"c/5 

05 

b£ 

05 

05 


c/i 

05 


PsS 

05 


05 


.2 

4 -> 

05 


O 

05 


o 


ctf 


44 

05 


05 

05 


C/5 

05 


05 

r- 1 

05 

c/5 

G 

O 


05 


05 

4-> 

C/5 

Ctf 

C/5 

r- 1 

o 


o 

O 

05 


Ctf 

C/1 

05 


U 

05 


C/5 

S-H 


% H 

\-4 


‘ • y_l 

rO tf - a; 


C/3 


05 

oG 

IO o 


ro 


im 


io 


an 


The Certificate shall show, inter alia 


<v 


<D 




0 

J-H 

• T-H 

0 

rH 

<v 

4 -* 

bo 

X 

0 

<v 

r~* 

<v 

J-H 

<v 

> 

X, 

ctf 

4 -> 

J* 

ctf 

<v 

p 

4 -H 

4 -> 

IT) 

<-H 

<v 


CD 

O 

0 

f-H 

4 -> 

4 -> 


O 

i — 1 

ctf 


cd 

CD 

<D 


CD 


-X 

ctf 

<L> 

,0 


0> 

<V 

, 

CD 


CD -qj 

bo cu 

C *- 
• O ^ctf 

""U 
ctf 
<D 
j-h 


o 

<u 


<D 

£ 

O 

Oh 

I 

<v 

CD 

u 

O 


<L> 


bjo 


<u 


a 


CD 

<u 


0> 

o 

(—* 

T-* 

ctf 

J-h 


w bJO 


J-h 

<u 

> 

<u 


o 

o 


O 
H 

bio <v 


O 

J-H 


o 

rv 


<V 

ctf 

o 

• • 

bo +•* 

)Z CD 

<— 1 q_> 

'qj 

^ <D 

v- 

O +J 


£ to £ 


bo <l> 

r* 

+-> 4-> 

t 

bo 

l ~‘ r-i 

° '5 
< 


jD 

o 

M—l 

<v 

r~* 

H 

CD 
4—> 

<—• 

<D 

c -1 

H 

4 -> 

C/D 

Co 

t 

o 

CD 

* 

• 1—4 

rtf 

Cu 

<U 

J-h 


j-h 

O 

o 

<L> 

J-h 

<1 


<L> 

<U 


ctf 

Q 

<v 

O 


CJ 

4—> 

ctf 

o 

'-C 


<U 

o 

<L> 


r—-4 

O 

o 

o 


<v 


ctf 


'w' 

<v 


bo 


j-. 

<v 

> 

O 

bo 

CD 


o c 


bjo 3 


<v 

CD 

J-h 

Ctf 

<L» 

i 

u 

ctf 

CD 

CD 

V 

o 

<v 


ctf 

<u 


o 

• *—i 

4-> 

j>, £ 

H. 

Oh 


CJ 

J-h 


e 

<L> 

4-> 

CD 

CD 


CD 

O 

J-H 
•4—> 

<L> 

Ph 


CD 

4-h 

(J 

<V 


(J c 


bo 

r- 1 

4-H 
* rH 

On 

4-» 


<L> 


<L> 

-4—l 

Ctf 


CD CD 

= <L» 

Ctf 

Kd •*’ 5-h 

pq 


ctf 

r-H 

X 


OJ <L> 

bO Q 

<u 


i- 

<L> 


<U 


qj • h 


CJ 


o 

C 

cu 

CD 

JG 

4—> 

O 

o 

J-H 

<D 

> 


CD 

bjo 


<u 


CD 

4—I 
J-H 

ctf 

Oh 

<L> 


o 

<"H 

o 

4-H 

ctf 


ctf 

X 

<v 


CD 


'-C 

<L> 


o 

Oh 

1 r H 
(1> ’—* 
CD ^ 
4—* 

O ctf 


^H 

CU 


CD 


O 

rH 

CD 

Uh 

Ctf 

<v 


S O 
O qj 
o qj 
, !—• 
qj bJO 
O W 

M-h -O 

<v qj 

cj »— 


OJ 


ro rt 


VO 


The speed entered for in the Trail was 1,400 revolutions per minute, giving a limit of 35.3 h. p., 

below which the horse-power was at no time to fall. 

• . ♦ 

The engine was observed throughout the Trial, and readings were taken and recorded every half- 
hour. These records are shown on the chart accompanying this Certificate. 



Part I.—First Bench Test. 


<D 

b/) 


<D 


D 


nj « u 'y 

G O 
O o 
D 


<D O 


< 5 ^ 


Kf C /5 
O/J rt 

G > <D 

C ^ C/2 

— rt >r C 

~ o PQ v 

<d i g 

r h-l In b 

o O’*- 1 

- <D «G c/3 


<u 

Q 

C> 

o 

4—> 

C/) 

4-> 

O 

iD 


co 

CO 

00 

co 


c« — 5- 3 .5 

o»S ! * 


w 


c/3 


Tt 


bjo 


C /3 


>> 

4 —> 

rt 


U, 
i-. 

t | ■ T—’ 

O 7 j D 

55 . 5 * 


o3 

u 

Q 


D 


£ 


C/3 


G tN. 



bo 

. 

C/3 

r H 

bo 

CD 

» 

4-4 

O 

* 

o 3 

- 4 —> 

m 

D 

D 


r" 1 

Ph 


01 


U. 

J3 

Q 


Vh 

D 

r\ 


A 


o3 

I- 

f—• 

Q 


>4-i c/3 

O D 

f . 

L 1 


£ 


00 

LO 

01 


m 


Con¬ 
sumption 
per Horse¬ 
power 
Hour. 

. CO 
-G VO 

~ md 

a: On 

.G fO 
Oh l > 

P A D 

cr‘ 1( Q 

+-> o ^ 

n 3 

s 

o ^ 


03 


u, —< 

D 03 


D 


C/3 

D 


^ O 

o3 cjo 

* 4-1 G 

£> | 
rt ’"O 

r— 1 

>4 O 
G u, 

D 

^ r 1 
a; — 1 
c/3 ^ 


o3 

D 


c 

VO 


c/3 

D C 

<*> £ 

03 

D 

C/3 

r-> 

03 

u 

o 

01 


o 

Q 

cT 

4—< 

C/3 

o 

r-« 

D 

U. 

D 

£ 

D 

D 


C/3 

D 


D 

D 

o 


03 

S-h 

b/3 

o3 

J-, 

o3 

Ph 


v-4 

D 


o3 <d 

i— 1 

C-G ~ 

D G 
rG O 

4 -* * -* 

- 4 —> 

Gj CD 

• ^“4 

U, 
D 

C/3 

D 

.G G2 

4-< 

. * D 

bjo r- 1 


o3 

C/3 


Q 


D 

C/3 

O 


D 

V-/ 


C/3 

C/3 

c/3 

03 

D 

D 


03 

1-1 

03 

GO 

r- 1 

t—< 

03 

4—1 

C/3 

c3 


D 

r - 1 

D 

n 

D 


D 

r' 

O 


D 

U 

C/3 

o3 


D 


D 


<G 

C/3 

03 

£ 

l- 

03 

u 

D 


vn 

r—* 
1—* 

03 


s_3 

D 


C/3 

44 

bo 


bjo x» 

<-* n 


D 

D 


C/3 

4-4 

1- 

o3 


C/3 

D 


D 

D* 

O 

o 

03 

D 


D 

r- 
■ 4 —> 

M—• 

O 

r^k 

r— 1 

c 3 


o 

r"j 

o 

4-* 

D 

CD 

r-c 

r< 

*—i 

o 

<j 

r 

t-H 

o 


b *~4 

GD 

O 

buo 


O 

4 —» 

03 
> 
g .G 

D Vh 
C/3 »- 

/*■> f “ > 

or C 


r *3 

io 



















































C/3 

V 

H 

bJD 

G 

• H 

c 

c 

3 


5 _ 

03 

Oh 


03 0 


rt 

o 


O h 

r. 03 
t -1 cl 


<y o 

03 . 

C '— 1 c/3 

05 03 

"o = 


C/3 


n ^ ^ 

PC 03 


__ 03 

o 5 

5 - G 

- 4—1 ^ 

03 03 

Ph G 

^ O 

u 


03 

c/ 3 * 

a3 

rt ^ 

O ? 

£ 


C/3 

1-, 


-m rt 03 


tN» 

CO 

CO 

CO 


xt- 

oi 

<N 


VO 

CO 

00 


On 


co 


00 

On 


LO 

LO 


r s >m*/ 

—< r-* 

to 

to 

VO 

to 

♦-+—< *—■ 

. 

. 



u So 

03 * ri 

01 

01 

01 

030 -<-* co 

-O i-i 

CO 

CO 

HH 

rf -C a3 

— VC' 

CO 

co 

VO 


CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

> 03 ^ 





<P Pjf G 





^ !> rt 





03 


hH 



'030 





rt 

<N 

H" 

VO 

<n 

sL> 

hH 

hH 


hH 


HH 

On 


HH 

h—1 


hH 









03 

; 


i >4 

03 

b 30 



t 

b 30 

*"CJ 



r-< 

o3 

* 



03 

03 


o—- 



r ^3 

>4 



o 


03 

o 

d 

rs 

U 


4 <" 


3 


M—I 

o 

h"' 

4 -> 

P* 

O 

4 —* 


o 


03 


03 

4 —* 

03 

o 

03 

« 

4 —> 

>4 

j- 

r~* 

rH 

O 

4 —* 

b 30 

o 

o3 

4 —' 



» 

£ 

03 

Gs3 

O 

P* 

03 

>4 



o 

03 

03 


O 

♦ 

!— 



u 

PC 

r 

r" 1 

. 


03 

* _ , 

03 

> 


>> 

03 

rt 

t 

H 

03 

o 

s 

o 

o 

i-H 

PC 


C/3 

03 


03 


03 

03 


: 00 

^ 00 

I—I 

Q\ 


03 


03 

03 


CO 

<M 

03 


03 

U 

03 


C/3 

rt 


03 

03 

bjo 

rt 

» 

03 

Cu 


03 

b30 

a 

03 


o 3 

-4—l 

o 

- 4 —I 

03 


■6 

03 


<N 

03 

S- 


»o 


03 

- 4-1 

03 


o 

>4 


03 

r- 1 

03 


03 

03 


03 


03 

03 


03 

Vh 

03 


03 


:£ 


b/) r 


03 

03 


>4 

Ui 


03 

3> 

O 

U 

o 

- 4-4 

'ojo 

u 

y-^ 

4 -> 

03 


^ o 


o 

03 


to. 


parts being disturbed. 















































Part III.—Final Bench Test. 


o 

O 


r — 1 

O 12 
4 — > o 


g <d> 

c/3 o 


u 

03 *- 

> 

> o 

§hK 


O ' 
u G 

o 

r j 

Oh ° 


03 


c/) 


OJO 03 

* 

S-3 

03 

rt c/3 

CD 

Gj 

U- ^4 

K. 

Uh 

03 0 


O 

< x 

O 

Q 

CJ 

03 



P4 







vq 

+-> 

OS 


G" 

s 

lx 

c/ 3 " 

10 

r—^ 

01 

c3 

O 

oc 

HH 


vO 


On 


00 


0G 


• ^ c/3 

o/] c3 

G > 03 

r ■" G 3 

G *G ^ 
■— rt _G 


<u 

/-o 

CD ^ 

£ o 

<d to 


O h 

03 i , a 

r~ l —I U G -I-* 

G O ^ O 

• ■—i 03 u—i c/3 

4-> ”G • .-. 03 

rt -G c/3 ^ .G 
g; .g! ^ h b/j 

O — 03 


c/3 


o * >, 

G . G ^ 
« h rt 

CD G g 

O o D 

i/S.E* 


03 

U 

G 

Q 


0/) . 

c/3 G >"» 

rv •- +-> 

—I » _, » ( 

o 


o3 _ 


o> 


£ 


rt 

U. 

G 

Q 


CO cj 03 

" G pL, 


S-c 

03 


£ 


M-i c/3 

O 03 
r 


Q 


£ 


0) 


DG iO 


C/D 

Ui 

Ctf 

E 

03 

« 

*^C/D 

03 

bJO 

T3 

G 


03 

f"" 1 

4-» 
M—• 

O 

>> 

rt 


o> 

o 

03 

0/ 

CJ 


C/3 

o3 


o3 

03 


0/ 


o> 

cj 

J—I 
03 


03 

o 

03 

i— 1 

o3 

i— 1 

C/3 

*G 

0/ 

-i—> 

03 


o 

o 

C/3 

rc5 

£ 

03 

G 

.G C/3 

bjO O) 
rn CJ 


o> 

o> 


H 


Oj 

«4-l 

u 

G 

C/3 

O 

o> 

4—» 
4—» 

<-G 


G 

o3 

03 

o 

Q 
-4—> 

O 


03 


o 

*4—< 

03 

}—i 

CD 

C/3 

(“i 

o 

4-> 

CO 

’E 

*G 

G 

o3 

era 

Ui 

03 

44 

r- 

► ^4 

► — 

(J 

03 


u 

03 

<D 

£ 


o 

bio 

r- 

c 

' 1 

o 


CJ 

OJ 

O 

r— 

CO 

C/3 

<D 


03 

> 

03 

G 

4- > 

<-t-c 

o 

C/3 

4-> 

5- I 

O 

<D 


r , 

H 


l-H 

u 

w 

H 

o 

co 

M 

u 

< 

0^ 


Cu 


u 


O 


< 

O 

o 

o 


c ^ 

■ ^ Kj 

rt ^ 

> 

w 


03 

4—1 

a; 

u 

a 

rr- <D 

ii co 


bjo W • 

*G 

co Q o 
as 


u 

CD 


<D 

4—< 

03 

Q 


119 Piccadilly, London, W. Chairman of Technical Committee. 








































COMMENTS. 


The following extracts, comments and replies 
to criticisms will no doubt be found interesting as well 
as instructive: 

There is no reason why this motor should not be 
an economical engine to build, as it is all round work 
and easy to machine and being cast iron it should 
prove much easier to work than steel and possible to 
keep the tools in a better state of perfection. The 
class of machinery for this work, although special in 
many ways, is simple nevertheless. 

This motor should be, if anything, less expensive 
to produce in a commercial way after the necessary 
alterations in equipment are made. It seems to me 
that an enormous saving can be affected in the final 
assembly and test as this is a cut and dried proposi¬ 
tion from start to finish. There are no valves to seat, 
or regrind; no valve covers to leak; no valve jumpers 
to adjust, etc. So including the royalty it should com¬ 
pare favorably with the poppet type as regards pro¬ 
duction cost. 

A further convincing evidence of the increasing 
popularity and unusual reliability of Knight engined 
cars is contained in a book entitled “The Knight Mo¬ 
tor and How the World Has Received It,” which has 
just been compiled by Mr. Knight, which is made up 
entirely of hundreds of personal letters and testimo¬ 
nials from satisfied owners in all parts of the world. 

A frequent criticism lodged against this motor is 
that it is hard to crank in cold weather owing to the: 
oil becoming congealed _between the sleeves. This. 


56 


condition, however, contributes little, if anything, to 
the tendency to crank harder. The ability of a 
Knight engine cylinder to hold compression is the 
true reason for being somewhat harder to turn over. 
Instead of this being a fault, it really constitutes one 
of the great improvements over the older type of mo¬ 
tor. The various poppet valve motors which I.have 
operated it was actually possible to hear the compres¬ 
sion leaking around the valves. Naturally this con¬ 
dition acting as a compression release should -con¬ 
tribute to easy starting as well as an inefficient motor. 
The only way to temporarily remedy this fault is to 
grind valves. It is not uncommon to find poppet 
valve motors in the final test to have a variation of 20 
pounds per cylinder in compression. This is an un¬ 
known quantity in the final tests shops of sleeve valve 
manufacturers. For instance, a poppet valve motor 
may be put in the pink of perfection but its efficiency 
steadily diminishes with use whereas the efficiency, 
smoothness and power of a Knight motor steadily in¬ 
creases with use. Slower progress in the develop¬ 
ment and adoption of the Knight principle in this 
country than abroad may be accounted for in various 
ways. Failure of Amercian engineers and manufac¬ 
turers to realize its merits, larger market for their 
output, litigation, stubborn prejudice, and lack of 
capital being among the main reasons. However, I 
predict some big developments for this motor in the 
near future. The increasing tide of sales is turning 
in favor of those manufacturers of Knight engined 
cars, just as surely as the backbone of the poppet 
valve situation is being broken. 


57 


(Extract from page 1020.) 

(The Auto Car, Saturday, June 7, 1913.) 

A THREE HUNDRED HOUR ENGINE TEST. 

An American Demonstration Run. A Feeble 

Exhibition. 

An event which has been attracting a good deal 
of attention in American motor circles lately is the 
recently concluded laboratory test by the Automobile 
Club of America of a 4 in. x 5J 4 in. (102 x 139.7 mm.) 
six-cylinder poppet valve Packard engine. Accord¬ 
ing to the rules of the test the engine was to accom¬ 
plish a 300 hour run at more than 70% of its best 
brake horse-power. This test the engine successfully 
accomplished, but analysis of the figures of the A. C. 
Ads report shows that the performance was not so 
remarkable as at first sight appears. For instance,, 
the best recorded h. p. that the engine gave was 44 h. 
p. at 1,533 r. p. m., which for an engine of approxi¬ 
mately 6,864 c. c. cannot be considered good, as the 
horse-power of an engine of these dimensions accord- 

D 2 S N R 

ing to the Dendy Marshall formula of - 

should be 67.45 h. p. 12,000 

The test was run at an average of 35.7 h. p. at 
1,208 r. p. m. Here, again, the showing is poor, as by 
the same formula the engine should have shown 
53.152 h. p. at 1,208 r. p. m. 

With regard to petrol consumption, this worked 
out at 1.072 pints per brake horse-power hour, which 
is about double what is usually considered a fairly 
good consumption, i. e., .6 pint per horse-power hour. 
A further remarkable figure is the consumption of 
lubricating oil given as 1.07 gallons per hour, which, 


58 



taken in conjunction with the standard gear ratio of 
the chassis from which the engine was taken, is 
equivalent to a consumption of 1.07 gallons of lubri¬ 
cating oil for 37 miles. During the test it is only fair 
to state that the adjustments made were trivial, and 
that only one stop of 47s. was made to rectify an air 
lock in the petrol feed pipe. But then, we should not 
expect trouble with such a small output of power from 
an engine of these dimensions. 

Compared with the Daimler sleeve valve test at 
Coventry four years ago under the official observation 
of the Royal Automobile Club, the Packard perform¬ 
ance takes rank as a rest cure. This is borne out by 
the volumetric efficiencies of the two Daimler engines 
and the Packard, which are as follows: Packard 6,864 
c. c., 35.7 h. p. giving 1 h. p. per 192.2 c. c.; 38 Daimler 
6,272 c. c., 54.3 h. p. giving 1 h. p. per 115.5 c. c.; and 
the 22 Daimler 3,764 c. c., 38.83 h. p. giving 1 h. p. 
per 96.9 c. c., the volumetric efficiency of the last en¬ 
gine being* almost double that of the Packard. 

(The Daimler Bulletin.) 

Mr. C. Y. Knight’s Reply to an Anonymous Criticism 

of the Slide-Valve Engine. 

{Which appeared in The Autocar, on October 15th, 

1910.) 

When first I read “Some Criticisms of the Slide 
Valve,” by “A Manufacturer of Poppet Valve En¬ 
gines,” I exclaimed, “An enemy hath done this." I 
canvassed the motor engineering field of the United 
Kingdom in a vain endeavor to identify a member of 
the profession who, in view of the facilities for infoi- 
mation afforded today, should be so ill-formed regard- 


59 


ing such an important subject as to venture into print 
with this mass of misleading* statements and absence 
of tangible data, and I failed to call to mind the name 
of a single engineer whom I could reasonably charge 
with the act. 

Then a sudden light dawned upon me, and I said 
to myself, “How stupid not to have thought of this 
before. There are tricks in all trades. This mysterious 
communication throws light upon a whole lot of 
queer things which have been going on in the Daimler 
Company's advertising department of late. It is not 
the work of an enemy. It’s the deep laid plot of some 
one interested in the sale of slide valve cars to draw 
this subject again into the limelight of publicity, and 
force me to help make the people sit up and take no¬ 
tice at show time.” Being of a retiring disposition, I 
have for the past year turned a deaf ear to all the en¬ 
treaties of the Daimler advertising staff to “write 
something for the Bulletin, or some other paper,” and 
all sorts of “jollying” and soft words of persuasion 
have failed to turn me from my avowed purpose ta 
“Keep mum and saw wood.'’ But the able director 
of the Daimler Company’s publicity department is 
artful and wily. He fully appreciates the fact that 
there’s more than one way to kill a cat. He has evi¬ 
dently read from the ancient philosophers that 
“Whom the gods would destroy they first make mad,” 
and in order to destroy my native modesty, and force 
me and the motor into the public eye, has concocted a 
a conglomeration of insinuations and suppositions 
purposely wide of the mark to goad me on to the 
rhetorical demolition of this straw man. Then I 
thought— 

“It’s just like Instone!” 


6 o 


And I will say that, so far as I know, up to the 
hour of writing Instone hasn’t denied its inspiration! 
1 -Ie even admits that such a controversy, started right 
upon the eve of Olympia, is likely to draw prospective 
purchasers in droves to the stands of those firms who 
sell cars equipped with sleeve-valve engines, and 
makes no effort to conceal his joy over the matter. 
And I more fully believe it's Instone, because 1 do not 
think an engineer would say some of the things which 
are said in this article, and Instone isn’t an engineer. 
Then I'm sure, after a close study of the article, that 
the Editor of The Autocar is mistaken in his assur¬ 
ance that the author is “chief engineer of a leading 
firm of poppet valve engine makers," because, surely, 
no such person, informed as one in his position must 
be, would permit himself to rush into print with such 
a mass of undigested statements, affording an an¬ 
tagonist opportunity for laying before the public 
numerous facts favorable to the sliding sleeve engine 
that would otherwise have no excuse for publication. 

The mysterious author must have donned false 
wig and beard, thrust a “T” square under his arm, 
rubbed some Indian ink upon his finger tips, and in¬ 
vaded the sanctum of The Autocar thus disguised. 
Those familiar with his wiles must in one voice ac¬ 
claim with me: 

“It’s just like Instone." 

Publicity he will have for Daimler at whatever 
cost! 

I positively know it isn’t my old and esteemed 
friend, S. F. Edge. There is no mistaking his efforts. 
When he used to take up his pen to write upon the 
sleeve-valve question he dipped it in vitriol instead of 
ink, and I could always divine the fact when a publica- 


61 


tion contained one of his caustic effusions from the 
warmth which permeated even to the outer cover 
thereof, and had it emanated from this well-known 
champion of the six-cylinder propaganda, the signa¬ 
ture S. F. Edge would have shone, even as the warmth 
of the language permeated through the many pages 
and outer cover. Mr. Edge knows too well the value 
from an advertising standpoint of three pages pure 

reading matter well forward to neglect, if opportun- 

« 

ity affords, to secure the benefit thereof. 

Efforts have been made to lead me to believe that 
the article emanated from the chief engineer of an¬ 
other leading company which produces six-cylinder 
cars exclusively. It is positively known that the Rolls- 
Royce Company clid some time ago purchase a 38 h. p. 
Daimler chassis for the purpose of studying the mo¬ 
tor; that they did make certain tests with the silencer 
removed; that they did claim at the time to have ar¬ 
rived at certain results which exactlv tallv with those 

J J 

which the writer of this article states he secured. 

But I thought it would scarcely be reasonable to 
suppose that a well-known concern with standing 
would make public the results of a test made of a 
rival’s production, with no opportunity for that rival 
to be present and see that the tests were fair. I know 
when it was suggested that, inasmuch that no maker 
of poppet valve engines has seen fit to subject his 
productions to the same official test that the sleeve 
valve Daimler had successfully withstood, the ques¬ 
tion arose of going out into the market, purchasing a 
motor manufactured by a firm which has been par¬ 
ticularly active in circulating public statements to the 
effect that the new motor would not stand up under 
work, putting it on the bench, calling in disinterested 


62 


witnesses, and seeing just how long it would last pull¬ 
ing one and a half times its rated horse-power. 

But this was at once frowned down as not being* 
cricket, even in view of the exasperating provoca¬ 
tion of continuous defamation of the new motor upon 
the part of this concern. 


However, the facts concerning this reported test 
at Derby were known to Mr. Instone as well as to my¬ 
self, and it is barely possible that reference to it has 
been introduced for the purpose of misleading me. 
For, as I previously remarked, Mr. Instone is, in an 
advertising way, wily, and his ways are sometimes 
past understanding. 

Possibly I owe the reader an apology for discuss¬ 
ing to such length the probable authorship of this ar¬ 
ticle. But it does make a difference. You don’t see 
the point? Well, as Harry Lauder would say: 

“I’m a tellin’ ye.” 

Once upon a time an old German Professor was 
greatly annoyed by the unearthly ear-splitting noise 
produced by a boy who, under his very window, was 
belaboring an empty wooden crate with a board. 

“Poy, poy!” he indignantly exclaimed out of his 
window, “what for you do dot?’’ 

The boy, assuming the very personification of in¬ 
nocence, replied: “Why, to make a noise, of course.” 

“Oh,” replied our German friend, now mollified, 
“dot vas all righdt; I thought you do dot to annoy 
me.” 

Now if this emanates from Instone, it is certainly 
done for the purpose of “making a noise”; if it comes 
from the pen of Mr. Royce, of the Rolls-Royce Com¬ 
pany, whom the title as given by The Autocar fits, 
then I must take it for granted that it is done for the 


63 


same purpose that the Professor feared the boy was 
pounding the box—“to annoy me.” 

There are times when anonymous communica¬ 
tions may be justified, when a great public good is to 
be served in an unselfish manner. But I am sure Mr. 
Royce, even though he saw fit anonymously to attack 
the interests of a competitor, would not in the same 



Drawing from Fred Royce’s New Motor as shown in British 
Patent Specification, No. 20,063 °f 1909. 

breath, with hidden identity, urge the merits of his 
own product, as is therein done. Such procedure 
savors too much of putting the husband out of the 
way and proposing to the widow before the funeral. 

Maybe I owe Mr. Royce an apology for making 
this a personal matter. But I desire to assure him 
that, inasmuch as quite a number of people really be¬ 
lieve his firm to be responsible for this effort, it is in 


64 






























































his interests that I take the subject boldly in hand and 
clear him from suspicion as far as it is possible for 
me to do so with the evidence at hand. 

Not only do I believe this conclusion of some 
people to be unreasonable, but I think I can demon¬ 
strate from this gentleman's own signed utterances 
that he does not entertain the views expressed in this 
article, which savs under the heading; “Silence”: 

“It has been written that silence is golden, and 
silence in connection with the engine of a pleasure 
car is worth much gold. 

“How far will an engine having* the large and 
rapidly opened exhaust ports which are a peculiarity 
of the sleeve valve engine fulfill this requirement? 
The answer is that the exhaust would be exception¬ 
ally noisy, and that, in order to smother it sufficiently 
to satisfy the present demands of users of pleasure 
motor cars, a manufacturer might consider it neces¬ 
sary to fit exhaust pipes and silencer which would re¬ 
duce the h. p. of the engine by twenty per cent, at 
1,000 revolutions per minute, and by thirty per cent, 
at 1,500 revolutions per minute." 

As a matter of fact, the exhaust of the sleeve- 
valve engine is much less difficult to silence than its 
poppet-valve predecessor. In the latter, not only has 
the noise of the escaping gases to be cared for, but 
the exhaust branches and pipes afford as ready a con¬ 
ductor of the noise caused by the seating of the valves 
as they do for the flow of the gases, as their effect is 
producing a mechanical noise at one end of the pipe, 
the other end of which opens out to the air. Conse¬ 
quently, the silencer in the case of the poppet valve 
has a double function to perform. 

Strange to relate, all experience is contrary to 
the conclusions of this writer in relation to the noise 
made by the open exhaust from a slide-valve engine. 


65 


On March 28th, 1909, a very novel competition was 
held in Paris, called “An Exhaust Guessing Contest." 

This was a contest in which the silencers were re¬ 
moved from various motors, and the contestants, who 
were out of sight, were required to judge from- the 
sound of the exhaust the identity of the motor. 

In speaking of this the Paris correspondent of 
The Motor, in its issue of March 30th, 1909, says: 

“The Knight-Daimler engine, the dark horse of 
the competition, and the one that probably not one of 
the competitors had heard running before, proved to 
be the easiest of the lot. The exhaust was so much 
softer than that of any of the French cars that nearly 
all correctly named it." 

I can scarcely believe that Mr. Royce could have 
entertained such an idea regarding the effects of large 
exhaust ports, as he has spent valuable time and much 
money in an effort to perfect a motor possessing those 
exact qualities. 

In the application which he executed as the basis 
for British Patent No. 20,063, °f I 9 ° 9 , for a piston-, 
valve engine, the drawing of which is shown here¬ 
with, Mr. Royce says: 

“This relates to an internal combustion engine in 
which the inlet and exhaust ports are opened and 
closed rapidly and silently, and remain open for a 
considerable period giving a large port area and free 
passage for the incoming gases and exhaust products 
so that high speeds can be efficiently obtained, and 
also in which the combustion chamber assumes a 
regular shape, preferably hemispherical and without 
any pockets, also in which the noise caused by the 
poppet valves dropping on their seats, which is pres¬ 
ent in the ordinary type of engine, is absent." 

One would think Mr. Royce had borrowed the 
phrasing of his patent claim from that portion of the 


66 


catalogue of some maker of a sleeve-valve motor in 
which the advantages of the Knight engine are set 
forth ! 

I am further led to believe that those who sus¬ 
pect Mr. Royce of the authorship of this article must 
be mistaken, because he, being well informed regard¬ 
ing motoring matters, would not endeavor to secure 
credit for an article of his production to which it is not 
entitled. The writer of this article says, under the 
heading of “Fuel Efficiency”: 

“It has vet to be shown that the sleeve valve en- 

j 

gine when adapted for use in a luxury car, can equal 
the poppet valve engine in fuel efficiency. Such rec¬ 
ords as the performances of the four-cylinder Vauxhall 
car and the six-cylinder Rolls-Royce car in the 2,000 
miles trial of the Royal Automobile Club, in 1908, re¬ 
main unbroken, and until they are beaten the poppet 
valve may well claim superiorly in the fuel economy 
of pleasure cars.” 

Surely Mr. Royce would never have placed such 
a statement in black and white. He would know that 
a Minerva-Knight 38 h. p. motor driven by Mr. Hugh 
Kennedy in the 1909 Scottish Trials officially knocked 
this Rolls-Royce fuel consumption record sky-high. 
The record of the Rolls-Royce, as shown by the re¬ 
port of the R. A. C. Trials of 1908, was 40.98 ton-miles 
to the gallon. The Vauxhall spoken of was but 37.2, 
and why it is mentioned is something of a mystery, 
as there were others in the same trials standing 
higher. 

In the 1909 Scottish Trials, however, the stand¬ 
ard “luxury car” Minerva-Knight, covering a distance 
exceeding 1,000 miles, established 44-57 as the world s 
record, 3.57 ton miles per gallon higher than the 
Rolls-Royce, and 8.37 ton-miles better than the Yaux- 


67 


hall record referred to, and its average time on the 
hills was rather better than that of any other of the 
sixty-eight cars in the contest. This won the Minerva 
the Scottish Cup for consumption, and so far as I 
know the record has never been eclipsed. 

Best official road records for fuel consumption, 
so far as I have been able to ascertain, are as follows: 




Under 


Miles 

Ton- 



aus¬ 


cov¬ 

Miles 

H.P 

Car 

pices. 

Date. 

ered. 

per gal. 

38 

Minerva-Knight 

S.A.C. 

1909 

1,007 

44-57 

59.9 Napier 

R.A.C. 

1910 

799 

42.57 

24 

Vauxhall 

S.A.C. 

1909 

1,007 

41.65 

20 

Yauxhall 

S.A.C. 

1909 

1,007 

41.16 

48 

Rolls-Royce . . 

R.A.C. 

1908 

2,000 

40.98 


Not only does the sliding-sleeve engine hold the 
record for road trials consumption, but its high speed 
track performance has never been beaten in this re¬ 
spect. 

During the past year there have been numerous 
consumption trials at Brooklands under the auspices 
of the R. A. C. upon the part of manufacturers who 
believed the performance of their products would be 
creditable. 

Not one anywhere near approached the perform¬ 
ance of the two Daimler sleeve-valve engines in their 
2,000 mile track part of the great engine test of the 
spring of 1909, which they covered at an average 
speed approximating 42 miles per hour. 

This record, as taken from the R. A. C. records, 
is as follows: 


68 


Ton- 


H.P. 


Miles 

Miles 

Miles 

Car. 

covered. 

per hour. 

per gal. 

38 

Daimler-Knight 

T 930.5 

. . 42.4 . 

• 34-94 

22 

Daimler-Knight 

1,914.1 

41.88 . 

• 33-37 

10.8 

De Dion 

13.8 

.. 40.17 . 

• 28.54 

38 

Napier 

13.8 

60.14 . 

• 21.95 

25 

Napier 

13.8 

•• 51-55 • 

18.08 

J 5-9 

Sunbeam 

13.8 

48.60 . 

18.26 


Then again, Mr. Royce certainly would not have 
made the error of characterising this Rolls-Royce 
R. A. C. trial car as a “luxury car,” because his firm 
was most solicitous that the public should know that 
this trial car was not standard, but built especially for 
efficiency, and that its makers were heartily ashamed 
of its performance compared with their standard 
product. Regarding this, they wrote The Automotor 
Journal under date of November 7th, 1908, as follows: 

“May we be allowed to call attention to the fact 
that the ‘Silver Rogue' referred to in the above com¬ 
parison was a car built specially for the 2,000 Miles 
Trial of the Royal Automobile Club, and that on June 
1 st last we addressed a letter to the Press, which was 
published in many papers, stating that as in this trial 
everything was to be gained by efficiency, power, and 
high speed, and that the silence was not a merit, we 
had decided to abandon in these particular cars the 
methods by which noise has been eliminated in stand- 
ard Rolls-Royce cars. We pointed out that these 
methods had not prevented a speed of over sixty miles 
an hour on the flat being obtained with ordinary tour¬ 
ing cars carrying four persons, but that it was evident 
that for the purpose of this trial nothing was to be 
gained by the employment of such methods. We 
stated that we regarded these two cars as somewhat 
fast and not altogether to be admired offsprings of the 
Rolls-Royce house, and that the ‘twins' instead of be¬ 
ing christened (as had originally been intended) the 


69 





‘White Ghost’ and ‘Silver Silence,’ would be known as 
the ‘White Knave’ and the ‘Silver Rogue.’ 

“It is therefore no surprise to us whatever to find 
that Lord Montagu thought that perhaps the Daim¬ 
ler engine had a slight advantage over the ‘Silver 
Rogue’ in respect of silence, because so noisy is she 
that our standard Rolls-Royce cars when they pass 
her in the street turn their heads as it were, stop their 
ears, and turn color with shame. 

Then again the following, taken from the article 
published last week: 

“The employment of sliding sleeves, which must 
be peculiarly dependent upon construction and effi¬ 
cient lubrication, would not be contemplated by any 
sound engineer unless their employment were to 
bring about some astounding increase in the qualities 
in a motor car for which the public craved, and which 
would govern the buying public in the selection of 
their car.” 

Most assuredly it would not. Surely Mr. Royce, 
as the maker of a poppet valve engine, never would 
have suggested this conclusive argument and evi¬ 
dence that the sleeve valve engine does “bring about 
some astonishing increase in the qualities in a motor 
car for which the public craved.” 

I can see that Mr. Instone would throw out such 
a suggestion to bring out evidence that such is the 
case. He well knows that I have a copy of a cable 
message forwarded by the engineers of three leading 
American concerns to their superiors, under date of 
October 23rd, 1908, as follows: 

“All three believe Knight principle valuable; 
some extraordinary results; advise send representa¬ 
tives at once.” 

And Lord Montagu, whom the Rolls-Royce con¬ 
cern characterises as a most competent judge and 


70 


conscientious man, in his comments at the R. A. C. 
meeting - upon the behavior of the Daimler Company’s 
first 38 h. p. model, which he drove several hundred 
miles in France, said, as officially reported: 

“idle characteristics of the engine seemed to he 
great flexibility, exceeding that of any other four-cyl¬ 
inder engine with which he was acquainted ; noiseless¬ 
ness, especially marked when under way and running 
at high speed, and great power of picking up when 
a hill had to be negotiated, or when, after a slack of 
traffic, speed had to be attained again to get out of 
traffic. Those were the results of his quite unbiased 
tests and experience. He was not interested in the 
least in the success of Mr. Knight’s engine, and he 
was not interested in any motor car company what¬ 
ever. He thought, therefore, that those tests and 
those experiences might be of benefit to the discus¬ 
sion, and he could honestly say, that he thought it 
was a remarkable engine. Whether it would attain 
the great success that some people prophesied was 
not for him to say; all he could say was that he had 
been charmed with the running of the car that he had 
taken to France, and he thought that it was, for a 
four-cylinder engine, the best he had ever handled.” 

Mr. Instone knows also that I can show that the 
Daimler Company during the first year of its produc¬ 
tion of the sleeve-valve motor sold nearly twice as 
many sleeve-valve cars as it did poppet-valve cars the 
year previous; that during the past year (its second) 
it sold nearly three times as many sleeve-valve cars 
as it did the previous year; and that for the past two 
months its sales have been about double what they 
were for the corresponding months of 1909. He 
knows that as a result Daimler shares have trebled in 
price since the sleeve-valve engine was taken up; he 
knows that the Minerva Company is right now sold 
up for 1911 without half filling the demand on the Con- 


71 


tinent, and that shares in that company have con¬ 
siderably more than doubled in value during the past 
year as a result of its unprecedented prosperity, and 
he knows just what I had to demonstrate to the en¬ 
gineers of such experienced and conservative con¬ 
cerns as Panhard of France, and Mercedes of Ger¬ 
many, in order to induce them to link their world-wide 
reputations and names with that of the Knight En¬ 
gine, and fo exhibit them as a standard product after 
two years of exhaustive tests at their works. There- 
fore, it is plainly evident that it is to his advantage to 
have these most valuable points emphasized upon the 
eve of Olympia. 

It is only natural that the advertising department 
should be interested in goading me on to produce 
something that will bring in Press notices. Therefore 
I can understand why such a taunt as reproduced be¬ 
low from this article should be inspired by our friend 
Instone: 

“No excessively large horse powers for size and 
weight have been forthcoming in the sleeve-valve sys¬ 
tem. One would, therefore, conclude that this en¬ 
gine is unsuitable for running at high speed power 
tests. I believe that all the records for power and 
track speed are as yet held by engines of the poppet 
valve type." 

I do not believe that any chief engineer of a con¬ 
cern making poppet-valve engines would venture such 
a suggestion, because, as I remember it two years ago, 
these gentry loudly and incessantly (until the matter 
became tiresome) clamoured for a bench test of the 
sleeve-valve motor. What they got now occupies a 
very conspicuous place in internal combustion engine 
history, since which time those who got their fingers 


72 


burned hti\e steered clear of the fire. However, the 
fact that the sleeve-valve does not now hold the hi°di- 
speed track records signifies little. Little was it 
thought two \eais ago that the sleeve-valve motor 
would to-day hold both the record for the longest 
continuous run under load ever accomplished by the 
internal combustion engine, and the official road and 
track record for fuel consumption in a pleasure car as 
well. At the present time, however, those manufac¬ 
turers holding licenses to manufacture sleeve-valve 
engines do not find it necessary to seek speed records 
upon the track in order to bring customers to their 
sales rooms. 

However, in this connection, I am rather at a 
loss to know what the writer is driving at. Here is 
what Lord Montagu said at the oft-quoted R. A. C. 
meeting of the speed of the 38 h. p. engine he drove 
in France, previously alluded to in another connec¬ 
tion : 


“As regarded the trial for speed, possibly he 
ought not to give the figures lest it should be thought 
that he was a 'road-hog,' but they would understand 
that it was in France. (Laughter.) It was in Octo¬ 
ber, on an absolutely straight and empty road, with¬ 
out any hedges and without any traffic whatever. On 
the road between Chartres and Le Mans he had let 
the car out for forty-five minutes consecutively on a 
hot day on a somewhat undulating road, and he had 
covered in that time about thirty-tw^o miles. At the 
end of it the tyres were so hot that he deemed it ad¬ 
visable to slow down. Such a test would not be pos¬ 
sible in England naturally. There w^as no sign of heat¬ 
ing in the engine, and the radiator was certainly 
cooler than with an ordinary Daimler, such as the one 
he had driven for a great many years—cooler than 
a 45 h. p. or 40 h. p. or any other existing Daimler 
type. On another occasion, between Argentan and 


73 



Bernay, he had run eighteen miles in 20 l / 2 minutes. 
Allowing for two slacks past cottages, a speed ap¬ 
proximating to a mile a minute had been kept up for 
the whole distance. There was no sign of engine 
heating, and the explosions were as distinct and regu¬ 
lar at the end as at the beginning. The engine, in fact, 
seemed to gather power on those long trials, and 
seemed to be working almost better at the end than 
at the beginning." 

Is there any sane man who desires to travel any 
faster than this upon the public highways? Is there 
any demand, legitimate or otherwise, for a standard 
touring car to be any speedier than this standard 38, 
even though “restricted at carburettor and silencer," 
if what this writer says be true? If there is such a 
demand it has not shown itself at Coventry, and I am 
pretty certain it would be little welcomed at Derby. 

If The Autocar article were written for the pur¬ 
pose of giving me an opportunity to call attention to 
certain evidence of an expert character, I would say 
under this heading that when one attempts to describe 
or measure “silence" in words, one has undertaken 
a big order. This is a question which, like the choos¬ 
ing of a wife, must be left to the personal impressions 
of the one most interested. No one can deceive a pur¬ 
chaser in this matter. All have ears and are capable 
of deciding for themselves whether or not one motor 
is more silent than another. The one thing the 
makers of poppet-valve engines have striven to do is 
to make their motors as silent as possible when run¬ 
ning idle at slow speeds. This is merely a matter of 
low compression, good distribution of gases, rich mix¬ 
ture, and a design of cams which permits the valves 
to seat as quietly as possible. It is true that the lower 
the compression, the less vibration at all speeds of the 


74 


poppet-valve engine, which, when boiled down, means 
that the less power this type of motor produces the 
less it will vibrate. 

This does not hold good with reference to the 
sleeve valve. If there is excessive vibration at any 
period in this motor under load, it is the result of lack 
of perfection in design or construction, except on the 
four-cylinder type at the very lowest of speeds. It is 
characteristic of these motors that they will pick up 
a loaded touring car on top speed without undue ac¬ 
celeration of the motor, and fairly “walk away” with 
it without any resort to the change-speed lever. Nat¬ 
urally a motor which delivers this sort of power at 
low speeds must produce powerful impulses, and any 
four-cylinder engine which pulls powerfully at slow 
speeds must, as a result of the design, show slightly 
more vibration at these very slow speeds than one 
which does not possess that power. But this unob¬ 
jectionable feature disappears at a speed of io m.p.h. 
upwards, and between 20 and 50 m.p.h. I will pit a 
well designed four-cylinder against the best six-cylin¬ 
der of the same power ever produced, either for quiet¬ 
ness or absence of vibration. 

Lord Montagu said in this connection, referring 
to the six-cylinder Rolls-Royce: 

“At high speeds he honestly thought that Mr. 
Knight’s four-cylinder engine was possibly the more 
silent, and the absence of engine vibrations at high 
speed was a very remarkable feature.” 

It might be interesting in this connection to refer 
to some expert and unbiased testimony in connection 
with the silence of the sleeve-valve motor as com¬ 
pared with that of the poppet valve. In America it is' 


75 


an open secret that the Pierce Company, who are 
conceded to stand at the bead of the industry there, 
have for two years been experimenting with the 
Knight sleeve-valve engine for six-cylinder cars. 1 his 
concern builds nothing but six-cylinder cars, most of 
which are more expensive than the highest priced cars 
upon this side, and their output it probably equal in 
volume to the output of all the six-cylinder works in 
England and the Continent combined. 

The chief engineer of this company is Mr. David 
Ferguson, an Englishman by birth and training, and 
recognised to be one of the most able and most con¬ 
scientious members of the profession. At a meet¬ 
ing of the American Society of Automobile Engineers, 
held at Detroit, Michigan, a few months ago, Mr. 
Ferguson was called upon for information regarding 
the Knight sleeve-valve engine. His reply is officially 
reported and published as follows: 

“The Knight engine has certain advantages. It 
is delivering the goods, and the Daimler Co. can sell 
more than it can manufacture. The motor is giving 
excellent results, and is more silent than you can get 
with poppet valves. The public want actual silence 
in motors, and if they demand such conditions we must 
redesign the poppet valves or use other types. The 
Knight engine has made wonderful strides and has 
created the demand for a quiet motor. I do not know 
that this motor gives extra power at low speeds, but 
it gives much more at high speeds. The perfect water- 
jacketing of the Knight motor as compared with the 
poppet valve type is excellent. One big advantage in 
conjunction with the sliding sleeve motor is lack of 
variation. In the poppet valve type the strength of 
the exhaust valve spring decreased .35% after six 
months’ use, and after one year the valves are found 
sticking up as well as carbonising. This does not 
happen in motors with sleeve or rotary valve.” 


76 


It may be said by way of explanation that the 
Pierce Company is not a licensee, as terms have not 
been agreed upon for various legitimate reasons which 
do not interest the public. But they have, in addition 
to having purchased a Daimler-built 38 h.p. four-cyl¬ 
inder motor, built for themselves, using their own 
practices regarding piston clearances, crankshaft de¬ 
sign, and lubrication, a six-cylinder sleeve-valve mo¬ 
tor to compare with their poppet valve type of prac¬ 
tically the same size, and therefore their chief en¬ 
gineer speaks from experience, not supposition or 
rumour. 

The article is so full of contradictions and in¬ 
consistencies that it is impossible either to credit it 
to a competent engineer such as we know Mr. Royce 
to be, or believe that it was intended to be taken 
seriously. 

In one place the writer says: 

“They (the poppet-valves) do not, as I believe 
Mr. Knight stated some little time ago, strike their 
seats like hammers," etc., etc. 

Then a few lines further along: 

“If an engine be thus improperly accelerated, 
the rollers actuating the valves are thrown off the face 
of the cams and a rattling is set up which warns the 
boldest chauffeur to desist. In the sliding sleeve en¬ 
gine no such warning is given." 

In short, this is a confession that, despite pre¬ 
vious claims to the contrary, the poppet-valve does 
jump off its cams at high speeds, and “the rattling 
warns the boldest chauffeur to desist. If, as claimed, 
the poppet-valve engine is the only one that \\ ill stand 
high speeds, why the necessity of a warning to desist ? 


77 


And if the sleeve-valve doesn't give this warning, it's 
because it doesn’t make the noise, isn’t it? 

Then again, under the heading "Fool-proofed- 
ness,” the so-called engineer says: 

“Another essential of a motor for pleasure cars 
(which are often in the hands of men who have little 
or no mechanical perception) is that it should be so 
constructed as to put it out of their power (so far as 
possible) to injure or destroy it." 

It is then charged that the carburettor of the 
sleeve-valve engine is so restricted as to guard against 
this contingency, and that in order to silence the “bark¬ 
ing” of the exhaust through the large ports a silencer 
which greatly reduces efficiency has been employed. 

To my certain knowledge there is no foundation 
whatever for either assertion. So far as I am aware,, 
all four licensees on this side are employing practi¬ 
cally the same principles and openings in their car¬ 
burettor for the sleeve-valve engine that were pre¬ 
viously used for the poppet-valve type, and in every 
case the sleeve-valve equipped car of the same rating 
is much more economical in fuel, as well as much 
quieter and more flexible than its poppet-valve pre¬ 
decessor. 

So far as restriction at the silencer is concerned, 
it may be said that as a result of over lubrication up¬ 
on the part of some drivers made timid by the clamour 
set up about the difficulty of lubricating the sliding 
sleeves, many cases were brought to light where si- 

* • 5 * • 

lencers had become choked as a result, and thus un¬ 
duly restricted, reducing the power of the motor 
greatly. The remedy was simple—clean the silencer. 

I suppose the heading “Engine Vibration,” was 
inserted for the purpose of giving me an opportunity 


78 


to give vent to my pronounced ideas upon this sub¬ 
ject. 

I hold that nothing tends to cause vibration in a 
motor car so much as the constant lifting of poppet 
valves against the gas pressure and valve springs. The 
inner sleeve of a 38 h.p. Daimler motor weighs 10 
lbs., and requires but 10 lbs. to start upward, as no 
resistance in shape of pressure is offered to it. While 
the mushroom valve of the poppet type of motor 
weighs but a fraction of a pound, it is held upon its 
seat by a spiral spring offering a resistance of at least 
80 lbs. for this size engine, and when under full load 
at the opening of the exhaust stroke (estimating the 
pressure of the gases in the cylinder at 40 lbs. to the 
inch), there is further resistance of anywhere from 
80 to 120 lbs. to the action of the cam, so that, despite 
all the care that can be taken in design and construc¬ 
tion, these valve tappets are always giving trouble. 
In the 1908 R. A. C. 2000 Miles Trials, it is recorded 
that a car to which such great attention as had been 
devoted to the design of these tappets as that, of the 
Rolls-Royce, found it necessary to break an otherwise 
clean engine record by a stop for the adjustment of a 
valve tappet. 

But let us see what Lord Montagu said in regard 
to this at the now celebrated R. A. C. meeting in 1908, 
when giving his experience with the first 38 h.p. Daim¬ 
ler sleeve-valve engine ever produced, of which the 
Daimler Co. would now be as much ashamed as Rolls- 
Royce ever could be of the Silver Knave. 

“The absence of engine vibrations was a very re¬ 
markable feature. ” 

I say, and can demonstrate, take two motors of 
the same power (not dimensions), one of the poppet 


79 


and the other of the sleeve-valve type, produced by the 
same firm, using* the same pistons, connecting* rods,, 
piston big* end and other clearances, same length and 
diameter crankshaft and flywheels, mount them upon 
the same chassis, so they may be similarly sprung* and 
working* through the same universal and slip joints, 
and I will guarantee that the sleeve-valve type will 
have so much of the best of it that no impartial judge 
would hesitate for one moment so to decide. 

This tendency alluded to of motors to emit smoke 
upon being* accelerated after running idle for some 
time is by no means confined to the sliding-sleeve 
type. Such tendency may be charged against the lu¬ 
bricating system, which must, of course, be suited to 
the motor. If such is not the case, why do the Rolls- 
Royce engineers find is desirable to connect the lubri¬ 
cating system with the accelerator, so that an extra 
supply of oil is supplied when the motor is given 
heavy work? The answer is obvious. A motor does 
not consume the lubricant when not under load. If oil 
in the same quantity continues to be supplied when 
the motor is running* light, the heat in the cylinder 
not being sufficient to consume it permits accumula¬ 
tion in various portions of the motor, and when the 
throttle is opened and a greater supply of gas is ad¬ 
mitted, which in turn produces the necessary heat for 
the combustion of this less inflammable matter, the 
motor emits smoke until the accumulated oil is con¬ 
sumed. 

Simplicity. 

The arguments against the sleeve-valve engine 
as compared with the poppet-valve type seem to have 
been narrowed down to two contentions. 


80 


I'll st > that the former is more likely to be sub¬ 
jected to breakages than the latter. 

Second, that it does not hold any long-distance 
high speed track records. 

Concede for the sake of argument the first claim 
(which is not a fact), where does it lead to? Simply 
to this: As there are some 3,000 sleeve-valve motors 
on the roads of England and the Continent at the pres¬ 
ent time, it is the easiest matter in the world to verify 
from the owners thereof our claim that the sleeve- 
valve engine requires by far less attention to keep go¬ 
ing sweetly than the poppet-valve. Nothing but pal¬ 
pable neglect or defective construction, materials, or 
workmanship in the beginning will cause it to make 
trouble for the owner. Satisfied owners by the hun¬ 
dreds testify that the driving of these motors has 
brought them renewed delight in motoring*, and the 
fact that four of the most sagacious engineering staffs 
upon this side of the Atlantic have endorsed, and not 
without considerable expense adopted it, is in itself 
evidence that there is something in the claims of su¬ 
periority urged by its inventor. Are motorists, who 
are seeking for the greatest returns for the great 
amount of money they must spend for the enjoyment 
of motoring, going to be deterred from experiencing 
this new and admitted delight afforded by the new en¬ 
gine simply through fear created in their minds by 
competitors that one in a thousand may at some time 
during the life of a car experience a breakage that is 
covered by guarantee? If the other type were wholly 
free from such possibilities, there might be something- 
in the argument. But it happens that the element, 
and practically the only element, which is likely to 
cause trouble with the sleeve-valve engine is also 


81 


a necessary feature of the poppet-valve motor as well, 
namely, the piston. One Rolls-Royce motor, for in¬ 
stance, in 1907 completed a 15,000’ miles test with a 
clean record as to breakages. In the next competition 
a motor of the same make and type was put out of 
business through the seizure of a piston. It is claimed 
that the seizure of a piston in the sleeve-valve engine 
is likelv to be more disastrous to the motor than if a 

J 

similar accident occurs in the poppet-valve motors. 
Concede for the sake of argument only that this is a 
fact, the difference would be but a matter of degree. 
In either case, the result is likely to be a broken con¬ 
necting rod, crankshaft, or perforated base. 

If the public could be scared off through such ar¬ 
guments, where would the pneumatic tyre be today? 
It is recorded that the much heralded 15,000 miles 
trial of the Rolls-Royce car cost for labour, materials, 
and repairs £281 8s. 4^4d., of which £187 12s. 6d. was 
for tyres alone. Think of the money saving that would 
have been made through the use of steel tyres, or even 
solid rubber tyres. Not only this, but consider if you 
will the matter of pneumatic tyres from the standpoint 
of roadside troubles. So absolutely certain are these 
difficulties recognised to be that time allowances are 
made for them in practically every competition, and, 
in some cases, are unlimited. Why not dispense with 
them and eliminate nine-tenths of the motor car’s 
disadvantages and expense? 

You will say at once, it is the pneumatic tyre 
which makes motoring sufficiently attractive to induce 
people of means to take it up. They are willing to 
accept the pneumatic tyre with the positive knowledge 
that it is the source of both enormous trouble and ex¬ 
pense, because the additional pleasure it affords off- 


82 


sets with an enormous margin to the good its great 
disadvantages. 

One lady, among the first purchasers of the new 
Daimler cars, put the matter very aptly when she de¬ 
lightfully exclaimed after a demonstration: “I would 
by that car if I knew positively that it would wear 
out in three months." 

If the article were written for the purpose of af¬ 
fording me an opportunity of placing before an in¬ 
terested public upon the eve of Olympia a lot of in¬ 
formation concerning the sleeve-valve motor, its au¬ 
thor can certainly consider that he has accomplished 
his purpose. 

If it were written, as some are uncharitable 
enough to suspect, by a competitor as the opening up 
of a systematic campaign of malicious misrepresenta¬ 
tion (such as brought about the six days’ bench test 
and the 2,000 miles tract test of April, 1909), for the 
purpose of endeavouring to divert from the sleeve- 
valve the tremendous tide of patronage which its two 
years’ performance in the hands of the public has 
turned in its direction, the effort will fail, because the 
people who two years ago refused to be misled are 
now in a hundred times better position to judge the 
merits and demerits of this system, and less likely to 
sympathise with such tactics. 

The Six-Cylinder Question. 

The author, in touching the six-cylinder question, 
says, among other things: 

“Indeed, there is good reason to doubt whether 
it is possible to build a satisfactory six-cylinder en¬ 
gine on the sleeve-valve system.” 


83 


I might reply that there are dozens of designers 
and manufacturers who doubt very much if it is pos¬ 
sible to build a satisfactory six-cylinder engine upon 
any system, particularly if such engine is permitted 
to develop power commensurate with its piston dis¬ 
placement. The problems of a six-cylinder of the 
sleeve-valve type are no different from those of the 
poppet-valve type, and in the past have been the 
cause of dozens of designers dropping the matter after 
a few attempts to make a six-cylinder motor both 
silent and efficient. This assertion can be most clearly 
substantiated by reference to the letter which Messrs. 
Rolls-Royce addressed to the Press November 7th, 
1908, in which they, with elaborate care, advised the 
public that the two cars specially constructed for the 
1908 Trials (one of which survived the competition) 
"‘being built for efficiency, power, and high speed, 
they had decided to abandon for these particular cars 
the methods bv which noise had been eliminated in 

j 

standard Rolls-Royce cars,” and that “the survivor is 
so noisy that our standard Rolls-Royce cars when 
they pass her in the street turn their heads, as it were, 
stop their ears, and turn color with shame.” 

Any manufacturer who sees fit to “abandon 
efficiency" and build a six-cylinder motor possessing 
only about two-thirds the power of a four-cylinder 
engine of the same piston displacement, can secure a 
fair amount of silence. But silence purchased at such 
cost does not find a large market, especially in Eng¬ 
land, where there is room for not more than one such 
concern of comparatively modest pretentions. 

But this silence is not obtained alone at the ex¬ 
pense of efficiency, if the selling price of the car is 
any index to the time and labor required to produce 


84 


-such results. Making a silent six-cylinder poppet- 
valve motor is a tremendously extravagant process, 
both from the standpoint of efficiency and pounds, 
shillings and pence. 

1 he reason why a six-cylinder, when efficient, is 
in certain particulars more noisy than a four-cylinder 
of the same type is well understood by advanced mo¬ 
tor engineers, who well know that the entire question 
is one of vibration aggravated in proportion to the 
explosion pressure, the result of the great length of 
crankshaft necessary. In a poppet-valve engine these 
vibrations are drowned by the valve clatter if through 
an effort to secure efficiency these explosive pressures 
are not too great. But permit sufficient compression 
to be employed to ensure efficiency and these vibra- 
tions make themselves heard and felt even above the 
din cf the valve clatter. 

Until within the past few months no manufac¬ 
turer has ever succeeded in wholly overcoming this 
vibration in an efficient six-cylinder motor. It has 
remained for the sliding-valve engine within the past 
few weeks to demonstrate that this can be accom¬ 
plished, and the successful achievement will mark an 
epoch in six-cylinder motor construction, and, I pre¬ 
dict, be the sensation of Olympia, at which time such 
a motor will for the first time be demonstrated al¬ 
though not exhibited. 

Large Sized Engines. 

The writer further says: 

“I am sure that no manufacturer building in¬ 
ternal combustion engines would think of building 
engines of large size with the sleeve system, and what 
is objectionable in a large size of engine is also objec¬ 
tionable to a less degree in a smaller size engine." 


85 


Upon what authority, I ask, does the writer pen 
the above paragraph? Certainly he must have a most 
remarkable gift for divining thoughts of others! 

Permit me to say, however, that he was never 
more mistaken about anything in his life. The Daim¬ 
ler Company, for instance, have made all arrange¬ 
ments to build slide-valve engines of large capacity 
for stationary work, and the only circumstance which 
has held them back is the fact that so tremendous has 
been the demand for cars equipped with these motors 
that, despite their more than doubling the capacity of 
their works, and employing, according to the Chair¬ 
man's statement at the recent general meeting, 4,290 
men, they have not been able to keep abreast of this 
demand, let alone branching out into new fields. 

Suffice it to say, this company have replaced the 
poppet-valve type of engine with the sleeve-valve in 
every line of its present production. The Renard 
trains, weighing from sixteen to twenty tons, which 
proceed along the highways at a rate of four miles per 
hour with the engine turning under full load at 1,200 
per minute, are equipped with sleeve-valve motors ; 
the railway cars which they have constructed for 
service on the London and Brighton Railway are 
similarly equipped; and their new combination petrol- 
electric ’bus, which requires an engine which can be 
depended upon to work constantly up to 2,000 revolu¬ 
tions per minute, is also equipped with the sleeve- 
valve motor. 

In the cases of the Renard trains and railway 
cars the poppet-valve motors which were previously 
in service have been scrapped and the sleeve-valve 
type substituted. 


86 


\\ hat more is necessary to demonstrate the faith 
in the sleeve-valve type of the concern which has pro¬ 
duced up to date more than 3,000 motors of various 
sizes from 6 horse-power up to 57? 

Records Held by Poppet-Valve Engines. 

Isn t it asking considerable to expect that in the 
short period of two years, with, up to within very re¬ 
cently, only two manufacturers in a position actually 
to deliver cars, both of whom have been up to their 
eyes in profitable orders—isn’t it rather too much to 
expect that these two could during this short space of 
time march forth and wrest from the grasp of the 
hundreds of makers of the old type every record, par¬ 
ticularly when it is realized that the makers of the 
other type, thanks to a large proportion of the public’s 
preference for the sleeve-valve, are not generally so 
closely confined to their works, and have plenty of 
time fairly to “live on the job" of high-speed track 
competitions. 

But I have demonstrated, I believe, that there 
are at least two most important records which the 
poppet-valve does not hold, viz., the fuel consumption 
record and the record for the ability to run continu¬ 
ously under a thirty-three per cent, overload for a 
period of five and a half days, then 2,000 miles in a 
standard car upon Brooklands at an average of over 
forty miles per hour, equivalent all round to more 
than 10,000 miles of track work at a speed close upon 
fifty miles per hour; then, returning to the bench for 
a final five hours’ test, show increased power, without 
a single adjustment or repair of any kind to the mech¬ 
anism, and at the end of the competition the judges 
pronounce both motors free from perceptible wear. 

Compared with such work as this, 15.000 miles 



upon the road at the legal limit is mere child s play. 
In the case of the 15,000 miles road trials, the 48 h. p. 
motor need develop not more than an average of 20 
h. p. in order to pull the car an average of twenty 
miles per hour. This small power at the rate of con¬ 
sumption secured would require a cooling ability of 
the motor to care for less than one gallon of petrol 
per hour! 

Place this same 48 h. p. six-cylinder motor in the 
position of the sleeve-valve engine on the bench, re¬ 
quire it, in order to conform to the rules of the test 
requiring 1.3 times the rated h. p., to develop 62.4 
h. p. as a minimum, and in order to come up to the 
sleeve-valve excess over this requirement, actually to 
develop 70 h. p. for 132 hours straight, requiring an 
ability to cool the motor through which is passed 
seven gallons of petrol per hour instead of one, as on 
the road, in this 15,000 miles trial, and keep it up day~ 
and night, what would result? Dare the makers at¬ 
tempt it? Where is there any comparison between 
the performance of these two motors—one under the 
easiest possible conditions, the other crowded into the 
severest test that could be devised? 

I fear our friends, the enemy—assuming for the 
nonce that the article came from an enemy—are likelv 
to be as much surprised at the result of their efforts 
to discourage the public from purchasing cars equip¬ 
ped with sleeve-valve engines as was the American 
professor at the decision of his class of young men, to- 
whom he was endeavoring to convey an awful warn- 

ing. 

“Young men," quoth he, holding aloft a large- 
photograph of the world’s leading billionaire, “here 
we have an example of the evils of a constant desire 


88 




to acquire this world's goods in great quantities. Here 
is a man worth a billion dollars. His income is so 
gieat that he couldn’t shovel it away in gold sov- 
ereigns. But look at his face; note the deep furrows 
which years of anxiety have impressed thereon; see. 
he hasn’t a single hair upon his head; he has, I am 
told, no teeth, he has no close friends because he fears 
no one loves him except for his money. His health 
isn’t the best. 


U 


N 


ow 


(eyeing with great pride and satisfaction 


his class of a score of stalwart, bright-eyed and vigor¬ 
ous American young men)—“Now, I say, how many 
of you would change places with this man ?” 

d here was no hesitation upon the part of his 
class. With one accord they sprang to their feet to a 


thunderous acclaim shouted— 


“I WOULD!” 

It seems to me that some of the advocates of the 
poppet-valve motor have undertaken to impress an 
awful warning upon the motoring public of the 
United Kingdom. They have said in effect to the 
people: 


“Here we hold up in front of you an awful ex¬ 
ample in the shape of a new motor which several com¬ 
panies who ought to be more considerate to us are 
endeavoring to market. We don’t know much about 
it except from the picture; it is evidently quiet; it 
looks as if it would produce power; it is said to be 
charming to drive, and affords the motorist a new 
pleasure in life; but we hear it won’t lubricate; it has 
been known to smoke when suddenly accelerated; 
and while it has undergone an official endurance test 
which none of us dare undertake, that doesn't amount 
to much, and it doesn’t hold any high speed records, 
and it might seize if von try to run it a hundred and 
twenty miles an hour. 


89 


* 


“Now, we say, who of you, in face of all these 
grave allegations, would exchange your old reliable 
but noisy poppet-valve motors, which give no end of 
trouble, but never, never, NEVER break, for one of 
these new-fangled inventions?” 

And to judge from the crowded condition of all 
the works producing the sleeve-valve engine, the mo¬ 
toring public have risen almost to a man, and with 
thunderous acclaim shouted— 

“I WOULD!” 

Charles Y. Knight. 

Coventry, October 18th, 1910. 



QC 



The Knight Engine 

and 

The Packard Motor 
Car Company 







/ 









































































FOREWORD. 


No inventor of an epoch-making improvement 
having* commercial value, it is popularly believed, has 
been entirely free from attempts on the part of others 
to appropriate the fruits of his labor. Recent devel¬ 
opments indicate that the inventor of the Silent 
Knight internal combustion engine is no exception 
to a custom which would be “More honored in the 
breach than in the observance." 

The adoption of the Knight engine by such 
leaders in the Automobile world as Mercedes, Pan- 
hard, Daimler and Minerva created such a stir in the 
European Trade Journals as to attract the attention 
of leading American manufacturers, some of whom 
sent representatives abroad to make an investigation. 
Among these was the Packard Motor Car Company, 
and so well were they pleased with what they saw and 
learned that they made an effort to secure it in a man¬ 
ner which we shall not characterize, but lea\e foi the 


judgment of the reader. 

The different stages of this little story are given 
in chronological order, beginning with an article by 
the Packard Motor Car Company, published in the 


Motor Age of February io, 1910, followed by a reply 
on our behalf by Mr. F. E. Fonas, who is carrying on 
the negotiations for the granting of licenses in the 
United States for us, which appeared in the same pub¬ 
lication on February 17, 1910. A brief article by the 
inventor of the Reeve steam engine, acquired by the 


Packard Motor Car Company, is also given. 1 his an e 
have not deemed of sufficient importance to digmf\ 
with a reply. A short article from the Automobile is 
also included, as well as two articles published in the 


93 


London, England, Autocar, the whole being preceded 
by a brief description and drawings showing the gen¬ 
eral construction of the Knight engine. 

We have put this little story in pamphlet form 
for the benefit of our customers and present and pros¬ 
pective Licensees in the hope that they will find it an 
interesting contribution to the history of a phase of 
our American commercial ethics which it is sincerely 
to be hoped will soon disappear. 

KNIGHT & KILBOURNE. 

Chicago, Ill., April 20, 1910. 


94 


DESCRIPTION OF KNIGHT ENGINE. 

In order that a proper understanding may be had 
of the Knight engine we give the following descrip¬ 
tion : 

Figure i is a sectional elevation of the engine 
cylinder. 

Figures 2 and 2 a are views showing the position 
of the ports at four points of the cycle. 

In the construction shown in Figure 1, suitable 
for a petrol engine working on the ordinary four 
stroke cycle, we construct the straight part a of the 
cylinder with a water jacket b along its whole length, 
and form the inlet and exhaust ports c d respectively, 
through the water jacket at the combustion cham¬ 
ber end of the straight part a of the cylinder. The 
end of the cylinder is closed by a water cooled head 
e, having a water cooled part / projecting internally, 
forming a groove g with the straight part of the cyl¬ 
inder. In this groove the ends of sleeves, h, k , slide. 
These sleeves are provided with ports m, n and 0, p, 
adapted to register with the ports c and d, respec¬ 
tively, in the cylinder at parts of their movement for 
the purpose of obtaining the inlet and exhaust to the 
cylinder, as hereinafter described. The sleeves h, k, 
are actuated by means of a pair of eccentrics, r, s, one 
of which operates the outer sleeve h, while the other 
operates the inner sleeve k. 1 he eccentric r in this 
form is placed 90 degrees ahead of the other eccentric 
Rings t are provided in the internal projection /. 
from the head of the cylinder, and bear against the 
inner sleeve k, forming a gas tight sliding contact. 
The eccentrics actuating the sleeves rotate once every 
two revolutions of the main shaft. 


95 


The cycle of operation of the engine is as follows: 

Supposing an explosion has taken place in the 
engine, and the piston is moving in its working stroke 
from the position shown at A, Figure 2, when the 
piston has moved to within about 50 degrees of the 
end of its out stroke, the port n, m the outer sleeve h. 
is almost in exact register with the port d m the cyl¬ 
inder, but is still moving slowly upwards, while the 
inner sleeve k is moving downwards rapidly, as shown 
at B, Figure 2. The port p in the inner sleeve k 
quickly passes the edge u of the water cooled projec¬ 
tion f, on the head of the cylinder, opening a straight 
exhaust passage through the two sleeves and the cyl¬ 
inder. During the rapid downward movement of the 
inner sleeve k , and outer sleeve h passes its dead cen¬ 
ter and begins to move slowly downwards. When the 
piston has moved through about 90 degrees from its 
out center on the exhaust stroke, the downward 
movement of the outer sleeve h becomes rapid, 
quickly reducing the opening for exhaust, until it cuts 
off the exhaust at the cylinder edge v, which is water 
cooled, just after the piston has passed its in center, 
the inner sleeve k, during this period having passed 
its lowest position, and begun moving slowly up¬ 
wards, as shown at C. Figure 2 a . The rapid down¬ 
ward movement of the outer sleeve h also brings the 
inlet port m in that sleeve into register with the inlet 
port s in the cylinder. The straight through inlet is 
thus open to practically its fullest extent when the 
piston is in the middle of its downward stroke. At 
this position the upward movement of the inner 
sleeve k is at its greatest velocity quickly cutting off 
the inlet, the cut-off being effected by the travel of 
inlet port c over wide head ring t, after the piston has 


N 


96 


passed its out center, as shown at D, Figure 2 a . The 
compression stroke then commences, the inner sleeve 
k moving slowly to its upward position, while the 
outer sleeve h moves upwards. At the end of the 
compression stroke the outer sleeve is moving rapidly 
upwards, while the inner sleeve just reaches its high¬ 
est position coming back to the position shown at A, 
Figure 2. During the explosion stroke, the exhaust 
port in the outer sleeve moves down into position to 
register with the exhaust port in the inner sleeve 
which is gradually moving downwards, its velocity in¬ 
creasing to rapidly open the through exhaust passage, 
as above described. 


♦ 


97 


WITNESSES 


















































































' W/TN ESSES 


/f/VEN TOR 


Charles yjinixjlik 

(/ Attorneys, 









































































.YtYWftYt 






















































































PACKARD CLAIMS SLIDING-VALVE 

PATENTS.* 

Detroit, Mich., Feb. 9.—A considerable furore in 
motoring circles was occasioned here today by the an¬ 
nouncement made by a representative of the Packard 
Company to the effect that that concern controls basic 
patents covering the slide-valve or double-sleeve- 
valve type of motor, the report going still further to 
state the Knight motor is an infringement of the pat¬ 
ent the Packard Company controls. It appears 
that the patent in the possession of the Packard Com¬ 
pany was one for which application was made in 1901 
by Sidney A. Reeve and which patent was reissued 
Letters Patent No. 12,991. The report further states 
that Charles Y. Knight, inventor of the Knight mo¬ 
tor, which has been introduced in England, France, 
Germany and Belgium, controls no United States 
patents covering the construction of the motor. 

Development of Knight Motor. 

The Knight motor was introduced commercially 
in America in 1905 by Knight & Kilbourne, Chicago, 
which concern engaged in the manufacture of this 
motor up to the present. In November, 1907, Inven¬ 
tor Knight took his motor to England, where license 
for its manufacture has been purchased by the Daim¬ 
ler Company, which concern is now manufacturing 
this motor and using it exclusively in all of its models. 
The motor was later adopted by the Panhard Com¬ 
pany, of France; the Mercedes Company, of Ger¬ 
many, and the Minerva Company, of Belgium. The 
success following the use of this motor abroad as a 

* Reprint of article from Motor Age of Feb. 10, 
1910. 


T 0 I 




substitute for the standard form of poppet-valve en¬ 
gine resulted in an effort to introduce the motor into 
this country and it is a matter of apparent rumor that 
several of the larger American concerns have investi¬ 
gated the matter carefully with this object in view. 



Claims No American Patent. 

The exact basis on which the Knight interests 
wish to introduce the engine among American motor 
car manufacturers has never been publicly stated. It 
is known, however, the Packard representative states 
that no United States patents on this type of motor 
have been granted to Charles Y. Knight, although it 
is generally understood that applications for patents 
are now pending. Such patents necessarily would be 
subordinate to the Reeve patent. 


102 































































































































Now comes the surprising fact that among the 
numerous patents in the control of the Packard Com¬ 
pany is re-issued letters patent No. 12,991, granted to 
Sidney A. Reeve and for which the original applica¬ 
tion was filed September 20, 1901. The claims of this 
patent, it is reported, not only broadly cover engines 
of the double-sleeve-valve type, but the actual con¬ 
struction of the Knight engine as it was made in this 
country and the later improved design of the Daimler 
Company. 

The Packard Company, naturally conservative 
in the matter of publicity, is reticent upon the subject. 
A representative interviewed by Motor Age said that 
the facts in the case speak for themselves and that 
there was little to add except that the Packard Com¬ 
pany is not greatly interested in sleeve-valve motors 
beyond general experiment such as has been applied 
to a whole lot of things that were never adopted. 

Features of the Motor. 

The essential features of the sleeve-valve motor, 
such as the Daimler, are the outer cylinder, the piston 
and the two sleeves operating between the cylinder 
and the piston and having ports adapted to register 
at the proper times to permit the charge to enter the 
cylinder and the exhaust gases to be expelled. 1 hese 
valve-sleeves are moved up and down by eccentrics 
011 a shaft arranged parallel with the motor crank¬ 
shaft and this eccentricshaft is driven by half-time 
gearing, similar to the camshaft of an ordinary pop¬ 
pet-valve motor. 

The sleeves are so timed in their operation that 
when the piston starts to descend on the intake stroke, 
the ports on the intake side of the slee\e ate just coni- 


103 


ing* into register with each other and with the inlet 
port of the cylinder. These three ports remain in 
register during this entire stroke of the piston. On 
the compression stroke the sleeves have moved suffi¬ 
ciently, relative to each other and to the inlet port, so 
that none of the ports of the motor are in register dur¬ 
ing the compression stroke and the greater part of the 
firing stroke. At the end of this period, the ports on 
the exhaust side of the sleeves come into register with 
each other and with the exhaust port in the cylinder 
and remain so until the end of the exhaust stroke, al¬ 
lowing the exhaust gases to be expelled by the piston. 
The cycle is then repeated. In function, it is exactly 
the same as the cycle of the ordinary poppet-valve 
motor. 

As compared with the motor built by Mr. Knight 
in this country in 1905 and described in Motor Age 
of October 26, 1905, the Daimler motor has omitted 
the offset crankshaft feature of the earlier model and 
uses but one exhaust port, where the earlier model 
used both main and auxiliary exhaust ports. Aside 
from these differences there are detail changes of re¬ 
finement which are unimportant. 

The Reeve Patent. 

Referring now to the Reeve re-issued patent No. 
12,991, the original application for which was filed 
September 20, 1901, it seems that twenty-five or more 
of the sixty-four claims in the patent cover practically 
all motors in which there are two sleeves sliding be¬ 
tween the piston and the cylinder and controlling the 
inlet and outlet ports of the cylinder. One of the 
simplest of these claims is No. 36, as follows: 


104 


I he combination of a casing - , a reciprocating 
piston, and two cylindrical valves surrounding the 
piston and operating one upon the other.” 

Ivefei 1 mg to the drawing* of the Daimler motor, 
it may be noticed that the “casing” of this claim is 



represented by the cylinder of the Daimler motor; the 
“reciprocating piston” by the piston U, and the “two 
cylindrical valves surrounding the piston and operat¬ 
ing one upon the other" by A and B. 


105 






































































Claim No. 39 reads as follows: “The combina¬ 
tion of an axially-movable cylinder-valve, a piston re¬ 
ciprocating therein, and a sleeve-valve movable on the 
outside of the cylinder-valve.” 

The “axially-movable cylinder-valve” of this 
claim is represented by the inner sleeve-valve B, of 
the Daimler motor; the “piston reciprocating therein” 
by U, and the “sleeve-valve” by the outer sleeve A. 

Another simple claim is No. 62, as follows: “The 
combination of a casing and a reciprocating pis¬ 
ton therein, a plurality of non-seating annular valves 
arranged between the piston and the casing, and 
means for independently moving said valves.’’ 

The “casing” is represented in the Daimler mo¬ 
tor by its cylinder and the “reciprocating piston” by 
U. The “plurality of 11011-seating annular valves” are 
represented by the sleeve valves A and B, these sleeve 
valves being “arranged between the piston and the 
casing.” The “means for independently moving the 
valves” are represented by the Daimler eccentricshaft 
and the gearing and small connecting rods. 


106 


KNIGHT ANSWERS PACKARD PATENT 

CLAIM. 


EDITOR’S NOTE.—This defense of the status of the 
Knight sleeve-valve motor is by F. E. Lonas, attorney for 
Knight & Kilbourne, owners of the Knight patents, and is in 
reply to a statement given out by a Packard representative and 
published in last week’s Motor Age to the effect that the Pack¬ 
ard Motor Car Co., by owning the Reeve patents governing slide 
valve mechanisms, controls the slide valve situation in America. 

Chicago, Feb. 15.—Editor Motor Age.—Claims 
made by a representative of the Packard Motor Car 
Company in Motor Age last week that it owns basic 
patents on sleeve-valve engines for the United States 
and that the Knight engine is an infringement of pat¬ 
ent No. 12,991, reissued to Sidney A. Reeve on July 
13, 1909, contains so much that is untrue and omits so 
much that is true, and the intention to intimidate and 
deter other manufacturers from taking licenses to 
manufacture Knight engines in the United States is 
so manifest, following, as it does, a veiled threat of the 
Packard attorneys, in their letter to us of October 30, 
IQ09, that they “should prevent the issuance of any 
claims to Knight by the United States patent office 
if Knight & Kilbourne did not accede to its demands, 
that in justice to Knight and Kilbourne and the motor 
industry of the C nited States I cannot pei nut it to 
pass without giving a history of the entne transaction. 

Mr. Knight, at the time this Packard interview 
was published, was on the ocean bound for England. 
In the absence of Mr. Knight the duty devolves upon 
me to answer this attack, and while I cannot hope to 
do the subject the justice that Mr. Knight could, I will 
endeavor to show the attitude of the Packard Com¬ 
pany by a plain statement of what transpired between 
it and Knight & Kilbourne. For a proper understand- 


107 



ing of what has occurred a brief history of the Knight 
engine and its success, is, I think, essential. 

First Announcement in 1908. 

The formal announcement of the adoption of the 
Knight engine by the Daimler Motor Co. of England 
was made in September, 1908. Within 60 days after 
this announcement a number of leading motor car 
manufacturers of the United States had representa¬ 
tives in England to investigate the merits of the 
Knight engine. One of these representatives was the 
chief engineer of the Packard Company, who was re¬ 
ceived and entertained by Mr. Knight at his home in 
Coventry. Through the kindness of the Daimler 
Company Mr. Knight was permitted to take him 
through its plant and show him every process in the 
manufacture and testing of Knight-Daimler engines. 
Mr. Knight and the Daimler Company believed he 
would treat the information as confidential and re¬ 
spect the rights of Knight & Kilbourne. Arrange¬ 
ments were made by which the Packard and other in¬ 
terested companies should be supplied with engines 
for test by the Daimler Company at cost, at a time 
when it was in need of every engine it could build to 
supply its own customers. The sample engine was 
shipped to the Packard Company early in January, 
1909, its chief engineer having returned to the United 
States in December, 1908. While in England he 
visited the motor car show in London, where he saw 
the tremendous sensation created by the exhibition of 
the Daimler and Minerva cars equipped with Knight 
engines, these two companies monopolizing the atten¬ 
tion of all visitors. He also was informed that Pan- 
hard & Levassor had secured an option for the French 


108 


rights to the Knight engine, and that negotiations 
were under way with the Daimler Motoren Gesell- 
schaft, the famous German firm founded by Gottlieb 
Daimler, and the manufacturer of the Miercedes car 
for the German rights. 



* * I ■ ■ ■ V 


Uren U. S. Patent No. 303,334, August 12, 1884. 

A Significant Fact. 

Particular attention is directed to the significant 
fact that, according to the certified copy of the Reeve 


109 





































































































reissued patent, Reeve, on February 9, 1909, within 
less than two months after the return of the Packard 
engineer from England, and within less than one 
month after the receipt of the Knight engine, made 
affidavit to an application for a reissue of his patent 
No. 880,824, of March 3, 1908. The fact, admitted to 
us by the attorneys of the Packard Company who had 
charge of the matter, that this application for a re¬ 
issue was made by Reeve at their instigation, and 
under their direction and supervision, through a New 
York patent attorney in order that the connection of 
the Packard Company might not be known, furnishes 
illuminating evidence as to the reason for Reeve’s as¬ 
sertion that he had not claimed in his original patent 
all that he had invented. It also furnishes illuminat¬ 
ing evidence that he had not discovered, until then, 
what Knight had invented. As to the validity of the 
Reeve reissue and the methods by which it was se¬ 
cured I call attention to the facts, and a few decisions 
of the United States supreme court which, I think, 
will show a reader unlearned in the law the Packard 
claims are unfounded. 

It is a significant fact that when the Packard 
Company advanced its claim to the Knight invention, 
under the Reeve patent, it did so in connection with 
the Knight drawings instead of the Reeve drawings. 
In order that the public may judge for itself, we fur¬ 
nish herewith a photographic copy of Knight’s patent 
office drawing and a copy of the main drawing of the 
Reeve patent. 

Descriptions of the Knight engine have been pub¬ 
lished. In a word, it consists of two telescoped 
sleeves, both having ports, and each receiving a 
definite valving motion from an eccentric properly 


110 


timed according, to the four-cycle principle and op¬ 
erated from the crankshaft. Both sleeves slide with¬ 
in the main cylinder, which has a fixed head project- 
ing down into the inner sleeve and carrying* the spark 
plug. This head closes both the intake and the ex¬ 
haust ports of that sleeve. The piston performs its 
usual working stroke entirely within the inner sleeve. 
During the compression and explosion strokes, the 
inner sleeve is hermetically closed above by the fixed 
head and below by the piston, so that the charge is 
fully compressed without loss, and when the explo¬ 
sion occurs its full force is exerted directly against the 
piston in a perfectly cylindrical combustion chamber 
having neither side chambers nor crevices to detract 
from the force of the explosion or to catch accumula¬ 
tions of carbon. 

The Reeve Device. 

The Reeve device is described as a steam engine 
of the double-acting horizontal type. The piston 6 
works in a sliding cylinder 5 arranged in a casing 1 
which constitutes the steam chest or head chamber. 
This sliding cylinder is not operated by an eccentric 
or other positive means, like the Knight inner sleeve, 
but is caused to slide endwise by the friction of the 
piston, so that when the piston starts to move in one 
direction the sleeve will slide therewith and cause its 
exhaust port 70 in one end or the other to register 
with one of the exhaust ports 10 in the casing or steam 
chest to permit the steam to escape from the forward 
side of the advancing piston. All this is common 
practice and well known in the steam engine and hy¬ 
draulic engine arts. In the outer ends of this sliding 
cylinder 5, however, Reeve places two piston valves 
15, which are adapted to close the inlet ports 120 of 


hi 


r 



112 


Reeve Re-Issue No. 12,991, July 13, 1909. 
















































































































the sliding cylinder when a spring 119 behind each 
piston valve forces it inward, and the sliding cylinder 
5 is forced towards it by the friction of the piston as 
the piston moves in that direction. The pressure for 
moving the piston is exerted between the piston valve 
15 and the piston, and during the working and ex¬ 
haust strokes the piston valve is held from moving* 
outward by a latch device which is supposed to let 
go at the proper time during the return stroke of the 
piston to permit the steam that has been compressed 
between the piston and piston valve to force the pis¬ 
ton valve outward against the spring and cause the 
piston valve to slide out from under and again open 
the inlet port in the sliding cylinder 5. Whether or 
not such a contrivance would work even as a steam 
engine never has been demonstrated, for according 
to the admission of the patentees an engine made 
upon this principle never had been built. 

Reeve shows two forms of his device, one of 
which is constructed as above described. The other 
is the same, excepting that he has supplied the slid¬ 
ing cylinder 5 with an auxiliary valve 121 at each end 
for the common purpose of co-operating with the pis¬ 
ton valve 15 in cutting off the cylinder admission more 
economically than could be done by means of the pis¬ 
ton valve alone. This auxiliary cut-off valve is found 
in the steam engine art in various forms; that is, as 
piston valve, hat side valve, ring valve and sleeve. 

1 

Reeve has chosen the ring form, which he places 
around each of the protruding ends of the sliding cyl¬ 
inder 5, and which he says he operates from the crank¬ 
shaft by an eccentric in the usual way, although he 
does not show the eccentric or operating means. A 
detailed comparison is unnecessary to convince the 


thinking engineer that whatever merit the Reeve de¬ 
vice may possess as a steam engine, it could not, even 
by any possible distortion, be converted into an in¬ 
ternal explosion engine, nor could the terms which 
have been applied to the elements of the Knight struc¬ 
ture possibly mean the same thing when applied to 
the Reeve structure, or vice versa. 

Has Attracted Attention. 

The combination of elements which constitute 
the sleeve-valve internal explosion motor apparently 
has caused the world to sit up and take notice, but 
there was no new result or effect produced by the al¬ 
leged improvements Reeve made in the steam engine. 
It was common in the steam engine art years before 
Reeve’s invention, as shown by the United States pat¬ 
ent of Uren, No. 303,344, issued August 12, 1884, to 
have the main piston B 2 slide in a sliding cylinder C 
contained within a casing or main cylinder A and hav¬ 
ing ports adapted to register with ports in the casing 
for controlling the cylinder admission and exhaust, 
the internal sliding cylinder being moved by the fric¬ 
tion of the piston, as in -the Reeve patent, and it was 
also old in hydraulic motors, as shown in United 
States patent No. 352,797 of Baldwin, November 15, 
1886, to provide the internal sliding cylinder K with 
an auxiliary cut-off valve, 1, 2, 3, 4 encircling each end 
in the form of a ring and controlling the admission 
ports, i, i' in the sliding cylinder Iv. In this Baldwin 
patent these cut-off valves are connected together so 
as to move in unison by a cylinder W surrounding the 
internal cylinder K, and both of these cylinders are 
contained within a main cylinder of casing G having 

an inlet port Z. The cutoff valves 1, 2, 3, 4 receive 


definite motion from a valve operating rod N, just as 
in the Reeve patent. The piston in this Baldwin pat¬ 
ent is shown at J, and while it is the main piston it 



also serves as two piston valves for controlling the ex- 
haust ports M, M' in the internal sliding cylinder. 







































































To apply these cut-off valves of the Baldwin pat¬ 
ent to the Uren steam engine, or to use steam in the 
Baldwin engine instead of water was mere child's 
play. Every steam engineer understands the uses of 
the cut-off valve, and should any steam engine, struc¬ 
ture require one, he has a large number of examples 
in the art from which to choose, and there could be no 
possible invention in his choosing the ring form of 
Baldwin for use on the Uren form of steam engine, 
nor for importing into the Baldwin engine Uren’s 
specific form of sliding cylinder and working piston 
for Baldwin’s special form of sliding cylinder and 
working piston. These are only some of the examples 
in the prior art of Reeve’s alleged improvements in 
steam engines. 

Other Reasons Given. 

But these are not the only reasons why the Reeve 
reissue patent is of no force and effect to cover the 
Knight invention. When we examine into the con¬ 
duct of the present owners of the Reeve patent their 
efforts to obtain a reissue for the express purpose of 
covering the Knight engine after they were aware 
that the rights of Knight and Kilbourne had inter¬ 
vened and that a large fortune had been expended by 
these gentlemen in the development of the Knight 
motor, and when we examine the records of the pat¬ 
ent office relating to the Reeve original and reissue 
patents and find that the reissue covers a different in¬ 
vention from what was covered in the original, there 
is nothing left to be said in favor of the Reeve reissue 
patent, even if it be assumed that it is not completely 
anticipated or void in view of the prior art. The law 
on this subject of intervening rights and the reissu- 

116 


ance of a patent to cover an invention not originally 
intended to be covered in the original patent, is so 
clear and the points have been so repeatedly decided 
by the United States supreme court and the United 
States circuit courts of appeal as to leave no room for 
even a shadow of doubt. 

As w e ha\ e before pointed out, Reeve shows in 
his drawings two forms of the steam engine. In one 
of these he employs the ring valve around the main 
cylinder valve as an auxiliary cut-off. In the other 
form his cut-off valve is omitted entirely. It is im¬ 
portant here to note that the form employing the cut¬ 
off valve is the only form using an eccentric for the 
operation of either valve, and in that form it is used 
for operating the cut-off valve. Now, Reeve in his 
original patent made this statement: 

The principal advantages of my invention as ap¬ 
plied to steam engines are * * * —6—The elimina¬ 
tion of eccentrics as transmitters of power for operat¬ 
ing valves. 

It is seen from this statement that any steam en- 
gine having an eccentric for operating the valve 
would not possess the advantages of the Reeve inven¬ 
tion. The present owners of the Reeve reissue also 
saw this and fully appreciated the fact that the Reeve 
original patent claimed a structure in which no eccen¬ 
tric was employed, and consequently must have 
claimed the form of the Reeve engine which does not 
contain the outside auxiliary or cut-off valve. There¬ 
fore when applying for the reissue patent they 
adroitly omitted from the specification the statement 
of advantages above quoted so as to be able to direct 
the claims of the reissue to the form of the engine 
having the outside cut-off valve operated by an eccen- 




trie. Consequently the reissue is for a different in¬ 
vention from that which the patentee intended to 
cover by the original. The United States circuit 
court at Chicago in the case of Chicago Railway 



Equipment Co. vs. Perry Sidebearing Co., 170 Fed- 
Rep., 968, recently has settled these questions in a 
very exhaustive opinion, and this decision has been 
sustained by the United States circuit court of ap~ 


118 




















































































peals and enforced against the reissue even to greater 
limits. In this decision the court said: 

Thus it is sought by the language of the reissue 
claims to broaden the limited claims of the original 
patent into claims covering the whole field. * * * 

It seeks to bring within the monopoly of its patent 
side bearings not apparently in mind at the time of 
filing the original application. * * * It can 

hardly be claimed that the original patent was not a 
complete device. It was operative just as completely 
as that of the reissue patent. For all that Wands was 
seeking, it was in itself a finished side bearing ar¬ 
rangement. Later he thought he could just as well 
claim the resilient centering device and make it apply 
to every friction side bearing which is centered by a 
spring*. Undoubtedly he made the mistake of not 
claiming the larger invention, if it be such, in his first 
application; but this is not the mistake the statute 
and the courts have in mind, authorizing the grant of 
reissue patents. 

Supreme Court Decision. 

In Campbell vs. James, 104 U. S., 356, the United 
States supreme court said: 

When a patent fully and clearly without ambig¬ 
uity or obscurity describes and claims a specific in¬ 
vention complete in itself so that it cannot be said to 
be inoperative or invalid by reason of a defective or 
insufficient specification, a reissue cannot be had for 
the purpose of expanding and generalizing the 
claim. * * * 

The United States supreme court, in Burr vs. 
Duryee, 1 Wall, 53L U L. Ed., 650, said: 


The surrender of valid patents and the granting 
of reissue thereon with expanded or equivocal claims, 
when the original was clearly neither inoperative nor 
invalid, and which specification is neither defective 
nor insufficient, is a great abuse of the privilege 
granted by the statute and productive of great injury 
to the public. This privilege was not given to the pat¬ 
entee or his assignee in order that the patent may be 
rendered more elastic or expansive, and therefore more 
available for the suppression of all other invention. 

The United States supreme court in Corbin Lock 
Co. vs. Eagle Lock Co., 150 U. S., 42, in condemning 
the practice of broadening the claims to include an 
element not originally covered, but merely described 
and shown in the drawing states: 

It is settled by the authorities that to warrant 
new and broader claims in a reissue, such claims must 
not be merely suggested or indicated in the original 
specification, drawings or original patent that they 
constitute parts or portions of the inventions which 
were intended or sought to be covered or secured by 
such original patent. 

The force of this decision is clearly apparent, 
since Reeve intended by his original patent to cover 
a steam engine in which there would be no eccentric 
for operating the valves, whereas in his reissue patent 
it became necessary to claim the eccentric operated 
valve in order to establish a color of right to the 
Knight invention. 

Re-Issue Held Invalid. 

In Huber vs. Nelson, 148 U. S., 270, the United 
States supreme court held the reissue invalid because 
it left out one of the elements of the original claims. 


120 


In Chicago Railway Equipment Co. vs. Perry 
Co., above referred to, the United States circuit court 
at Chicago, in speaking of the effort of the reissue 
patentee to enlarge his claim by omitting an element 
originally described as important, states: 

These two things are vital elements of that pat¬ 
ent. Now it is sought by reissue to drop out the dis¬ 
tinctive feature of the patent as described in the 
claims and substitute another element. 

This comment is pertinent because Reeve seeks 
Ry his reissue to drop out the statement contained in 
the original making essential the form of his engine 
in which no eccentric is employed for operating the 
valves, and then to specifically cover this eccentric 
form by his reissue claims. 

The United States circuit court of appeals in New 
York in the case of Carpenter Co. vs. Searle, 60 Fed. 
Rep., 82, laid down the rule to be the same rule as 
announced in the Chicago Railway Equipment Co. 
case, that: 

Unless the court can find that the invention of 
the reissue is described as the invention in the original, 
-and that the patentee intended to secure it as his in¬ 
vention in the original, the reissue is invalid. It is not 
for the same invention. 

The United States supreme court, in Miller vs. 
Brass Co., 140 Otto., 350, said: 

These afterthoughts developed by the subse¬ 
quent course of improvement, and intended by an ex¬ 
pansion of claims to sweep into one net all the appli¬ 
ances' necessary to monopolize a profitable manufac¬ 
ture, are obnoxious to grave animadversion. 1 
But it must be remembered that the claim of a specific 
device or combination and an omission to claim othei 


121 


devices or combinations apparent on the face of the 
patent are, in law, a dedication to the public of that 
which is not claimed. 

Regarding intervening rights, or the rights of a 
party to continue to make that which was not covered 
by the original patent, but is covered by the subse¬ 
quent reissue, the United States supreme court holds 
that: 

When complainant delayed six months and in the 
meantime the subject of the reissue claims has gone 
into general use, such reissue is void. Parker vs. Yale,. 
123 U. S., 87. 

The explosion engine expert, Dugald Clerk, of 
London, England, who testified for the successful 
party in the Selden litigation, in passing upon the 
Reeve reissue states it to be his opinion as follows: 

The Reeve devices are, in my view, utterly in¬ 
capable of being applied to any internal combustion 
engine, and indeed there is not suggestion of any such 
application in any way found in the Reeve patent. 
* * * In my view, it could be freely contended 

that the reissue claims do not properly cover the same 
invention as was found in the original patent before 
reissue, * * * and in my view no action for in¬ 
fringement on the Reeve patent as reissued, could be 
successful in restraining the use of the Knight en¬ 
gines; * * * and in my view, the owners of the 

Knight patents have nothing to fear from the Reeve 
reissue, which may be entirely disregarded in deal¬ 
ing with licenses under the said Knight patents. 

In speaking of the Reeve structure and the reis¬ 
sued claims advanced by the Packard Company, he 
further says that the same are: 


122 


Invalid for want of novelty, and in my view no 
■action for infringement on the Reeve patent, as reis¬ 
sued, could be successful in restraining the use of the 
Knight engine. 

Opinions of Lawyers. 

In the opinion of eminent American counsel: 

The Reeve reissue patent No. 12,991 is invalid 
and void and of no force and effect to cover the 
Knight internal combustion engine, for four reasons: 
First, the reissued claims are not for the same inven¬ 
tion as that intended to be covered by the original 
claims; second, the very extensive rights of Knight & 
Kilbourne have intervened since the granting of the 
-original; third, the claims of the reissued patent, 
wherever sounding in terms like the Knight construc¬ 
tion, are old in the steam engine and hydraulic engine 
arts, and fourth, the claims of the Reeve patent do not 
mean the same thing, when read with reference to the 
construction of the Knight engine, as they do when 
read with reference to the Reeve steam engine, and 
when attempt is made to construe them so broadly as 
to cover the Knight invention, which did not exist 
until years after Reeve applied for his patent, they be¬ 
came so general as to be readily anticipated by prior 
steam engine devices. 

While the Reeve reissue was pending I called on 
the Packard Company two or three times and met its 
president, general manager and chief engineer, all of 
whom seemed greatly interested in securing infor¬ 
mation regarding the Knight engine and its progress 
in Europe, but they did not drop a hint that they w^ere 
using the confidential information given them in for¬ 
mulating claims covering the Knight construction for 
the Reeve reissue. 


123 


Foreign Deals Made. 

During the summer of 1909 I returned to Europe, 
where arrangements were made with the Daimler 
Motor Co., Minerva Motors Limited of Belgium, 
Panhard & Levassor of France and Daimler Motoren 
Gesselschaft of Germany, all of which had options for 
exclusive licenses for their respective countries, by 
which if they subsequently exercised their options 
and took final licenses, which all have since done, they 
would accept a uniform license then agreed upon, 
which provided that all licenses should pay the same 
royalties, and in the event of any reduction in the rate 
to any licensee all should immediately receive the 
benefit of such reduction. This license, with a few 
modifications to make it conform to American legal 
conditions, was mailed to the Packard Company on 
behalf of Knight & Kilbourne early in August, 1909, 
with a request that further negotiations be taken up 
with Mr. Kilbourne at Chicago. About the same time 
I returned to the United States to participate in the 
anticipated negotiations with the Packard and other 
companies. No word was received from the Packard 
Company until October 19, 1909, when it wrote Mr. 
Kilbourne it had received a copy of the proposition 
relative thereto and asked if he could come to Detroit 
on October 26. Mr. Kilbourne and I called at the 
Packard works in Detroit on October 26, and were re¬ 
ceived by its chief engineer, and introduced to its 
local patent counsel, Milton Tibbetts, and its general 
patent counsel, James S. Watson, of Washington. 
Both the president and general manager of the Pack¬ 
ard Company were out of town. 

Mr. Watson stated that, on behalf of the Pack' 
ard Company, they had made the most exhaustive 


124 


search they knew how, and that this search revealed 
nothing that affected the Knight construction except 
the Reeve patent. I said to Mr. Watson that I did not 
see how an internal combustion engine could be built 
in accordance with it which would work. Mr. Wat¬ 
son said that probably was true. 

I asked whether he was speaking- for the other 
companies which originally had invited the Packard 
Company to join in the negotiations for the Knight 

o 

patents, and he replied he was not; that he repre¬ 
sented the Packard alone and that it was the sole 
owner of the Reeve patent, and none of the others 
knew of it. Mr. Watson said they would be willing to 
turn the Reeve patent over to us for a half interest in 
all royalties received in the United States. 

Mr. Hoff, Packard engineer, thought it eventu¬ 
ally would be found necessary to permit other manu¬ 
facturers to have licenses for such a valuable thing-, 
as it would seriously injure their business if they did 
not have it, and in the event of our refusing licenses 
many would use the Knight engine anyway and risk 
the chances of litigation, and we would have the Sel- 
den situation repeated. Neither Mr. Kilbourne nor I 
gave any intimation of our attitude toward their pro¬ 
posal, and stated we would have the Reeve patent ex¬ 
amined by our patent attorneys and see them again. 
Mr. Huff told us he intended leaving for England on 
November 3 to attend the Olympia show in London 
and would see Mr. Knight. This he did, and, as I was 
informed by Mr. Knight, he again came to Coventry 
and was entertained at Mr. Knight’s home, shown the 
same courtesies at the Daimler works, given the free¬ 
dom of the plant and much confidential information, 
and at the Olympia show again saw the success of the 


Daimler and Minerva exhibits with Knight engines. 
He was also given the information that the Daimler 
Company had, during the. first nine months of its use 
of the Knight engine sold and delivered about 850 
cars, and in the six weeks between the end of its fiscal 
year, September 30, 1909, and the opening of the 
Oylmpia show, November 12, had sold more cars for 
delivery this year than its entire sales last year; that 
the Minerva Company had sold its entire output for 
next year before the opening of the show, and that 
Panhard & Levassor had exercised their option to 
take a final license and were straining every nerve to 
get cars with Knight engines on the market at the 
earliest possible moment, and that before exercising 
their option they had sent one of their directors to 
England to ascertain how the public regarded the 
Knight engine after a year’s use by purchasers of 
Daimler cars, and that when he asked their English 
agents, Messrs. Ducros, how many cars they would 
order if they adopted the Knight engine, the latter re¬ 
plied they did not care to specify any definite number, 
but would take all the factory could produce, but 
could not sell any more cars with poppet valve en¬ 
gines. Mr. Huff cabled his company that Panhard & 
Levassor had taken a final license and obtained a copy 
of this for the Packard Company. 

Premiums Offered in Europe. 

Mr. Huff, as I believe, also was informed that so 
great was the demand that Messrs. Ducros were 
charging a premium of $300 for Panhard cars with 
Knight engines above the price of cars with poppet- 
valve engines, which Panhards were compelled to 
manufacture until they could prepare plans and pat- 


126 


terns for other Knight models. He was also told by 
Mr. Knight that the option held by the Daimler Mo- 
toren Gesselschaft would be exercised before its ex¬ 
piration on January i, 1910, which was done early in 
December, 1909. With all this information as to the 
success of the Knight engine in Europe, Mr. Huff 
came back to the United States. I state this to refute 
the intimation contained in the statement of the Pack¬ 
ard representative that it has no special interest in 
sleeve-valve motors more than as a matter of experi¬ 
ment such as with many other things that have never 
been adopted. On the page immediately following 
the interview with the Packard representative in the 
Motor Age of February 10, 1910, in an article from 
the Belgian correspondent of Motor Age on the Brus¬ 
sels show, appears the following: 

The car which is undoubtedly the feature of the 
show is the Minerva, with its American motor, the 
Silent Knight. Last year for the first time this valve¬ 
less motor was shown and attracted a good deal of 
attention. It was, however, an untried novelty. Dur¬ 
ing the past year a large number of Minerva cars with 
this motor were sold and their success is almost be¬ 
yond belief. As a result the 1910 Minerva output al¬ 
ready is disposed of, and considering the fact that 
600 cars, or rather chassis, are being constructed, it 
is a fact well worth mentioning, considering this small 
country. While plenty of native makers only laughed 
at the American Knight last year and predicted a fail¬ 
ure for the Minerva, there are many who would be 
glad to pay a fortune this year in order to be allowed 
to fit the Knight to their chassis. 

“We have to refuse orders from now on,” said a 
Minerva agent to the Motor Age correspondent. 


127 


“Premiums of 1,000 francs are offered in order to get 
cars, but we cannot accept them. The plant in Ant¬ 
werp will turn out 600 chassis this year, by far the big¬ 
gest output of any Belgian motor car builder, and it 
is not possible to hope for more. We could, sell sev¬ 
eral hundred more, but it is a question of quality and 
not quantity with us.” 

Quotes a Packard Letter. 

But let us see what the Packard Company had to 
say on this subject. I quote from a letter written by 
Mr. Watson to the Packard Company, dated January 
4, 1910, a copy of which he sent me: 

At the end of our interview Mr. Lonas asked if 
the Packard Company was interested in securing a 
license under the Knight patents, or only interested 
in disposing of the Reeve patents. We assured Mr. 
Lonas that the Packard Company are interested in 
obtaining a license under the Knight patents if a suit¬ 
able license could be had upon reasonable terms and 
the Reeve patent negotiated as a consideration in 
whole or in part for the license. 

As to the intimation that Knight can obtain no 
United States patents, I quote from a letter from the 
chief patent counsel of the Packard Company under 
date of November 4, 1909, as follows: 

We have asked Messrs. Brown & Hopkins to 
give us some assurance in writing that they will not 
bring the Knight United States application to allow¬ 
ance while our negotiations concerning the Reeve 
patent are pending. You understand fully the rea¬ 
sons for this request, and we will be obliged if you 
will authorize Messrs. Brown & Hopkins to give us 
this assurance. 


128 


To this I replied on November 9 that Mr. Hop¬ 
kins had written that no further action on our applica¬ 
tions was due for two or three months, during which 
time we would have ample time to examine the 
Ree’s e patents and discuss the matter with him and 
his clients. On November 24, 1909, I wrote the Pack¬ 
ard Company as follows: 

Referring to the conference we had with Mr. 
A\ atson and Mr. Tibbetts regarding the Reeve pat¬ 
ent, we beg to advise that Messrs. Brown & Hopkins, 
our patent attorneys, have proceeded far enough with 
their examination to enable us to form an opinion as 
to the value of the reissued patent, and we confess to 
some disappointment as to its having much, if any, 
value in affording us broader protection. The cir¬ 
cumstances under which it was reissued, and the fact 
that it seems to be in greater part anticipated, leaves 
little hope that it will be of any assistance in this re¬ 
spect. 

On November 26, the Packard Company wrote, 
asking an appointment for December 4 in Detroit, 
and it was suggested that we send the Packard attor¬ 
neys authority to examine Knight's patent office files, 
which authority was duly mailed. Mr. Kilbourne, 
Mr. Hopkins and I went to Detroit, December 4, and 
met the Packard attorneys. Mr. Hopkins showed 
them an English patent which had been sent us by 
Marks & Clerk, our London patent counsel, to whom 
copies of the Reeve original and reissue patents had 
been delivered by Mr. Knight with instructions that 
thev make a search to ascertain the validitv of the 
Reeve patents. This patent anticipates a large num¬ 
ber of the Reeve claims, and we informed Mr. Watson 
that others were on the way. It was admitted at this 


129 


conference, which lasted a couple of days, by Messrs. 
Watson and Tibbetts that immediately after the re¬ 
turn of Mr. Huff from Europe in December, 1908, 
they began their search at the United States patent 
office, and that this examination was made principally 
by Mr. Tibbetts, who discovered the Reeve patent, 
and that negotiations were at once commenced with 
its owners for an exclusive license provided a reissue 
could be secured with claims covering the Knight 
construction. Mr. Watson frankly admitted that the 
circumstances under which the Packard Company 
had obtained it, and the use of the information we had 
furnished as the basis for the preparation of the claims 
incorporated in the reissue would not meet the ap¬ 
proval of a court of equity; he stated that while it 
might not be strong as a weapon against us in their 
hands it would be a powerful club in our hands to use 
against others, and an additional protection for the 
Knight patents. He said the defenses we could make 
to it could not be made by others if we held it, and 
that we could use it as a basis to make licenses and 
collect royalties at once from American manufac¬ 
turers, and hold your own patents in the patent office 
as long as possible. Mr. Hopkins said he had not yet 
made a search for anticipations of the Reeve patent, 
but that the circumstances under which it had been 
reissued were such that the same defenses could be 
urged against it in our hands as in theirs, because 
their connection with it would have to come out. Mr. 
Y\ atson said their license had not been recorded in 
the patent office, and he suggested that they destroy 
their license and all evidence of it and cause a convey¬ 
ance to be made direct to us from the owners of the 
Reeve patent. Mr. Hopkins said he would not ask 


130 


anyone to pay royalties under the Reeve reissue, nor 
did he believe that anyone would be foolish enough to 
do so. He said that it could not be used to construct 
an internal combustion engine, was never intended as 
such, and that in the reissue the original specification 
and purpose had been changed and greatly broadened 
and that the courts would be sure to declare it invalid, 
e\ en if it were not clearly anticipated by others, which 
he felt sure was the fact. 

The Packard attorneys at this conference wanted 
us to give them a free license and io per cent, of all 
American royalties for the Reeve patent. We re¬ 
plied that we could not do that even if we were satis¬ 
fied the Reeve patent was good, which we certainly 
were not, because, as they knew we had opened nego¬ 
tiations with three companies in America, which were 
acting with them, and that our European licenses, as 
well as those submitted to the American companies 
contained a clause that all licenses should pay the 
same royalties and that this situation would have to 
be divulged, as they were all entitled to see the con¬ 
tracts made with others. Mr. Watson suggested that 
they would execute the same form of license, and we 
could arrange to repay through a trustee the royalties 
paid by them or they would put it in any way we 
might suggest in order to conceal the real facts from 
other licensees. 

Dugald Clerk’s Report. 

On December 30, igog, the Packard attorneys 
came to Chicago, a copy of Dugald Clerk’s report on 
the Reeve patents having been previously furnished 
them. At this meeting they were told the Reeve pat¬ 
ent was wholly anticipated by prior patents which 


were submitted, and the claims were taken up one by 
one by Mr. Watson and Mr. Hopkins, the most of 
which even Mr. Watson admitted were anticipated. 

As to whether the Packard Company is inter¬ 
ested in sleeve-valve motors and desires a license from 
Knight, I quote from Mr. Watson’s letter of Janu¬ 
ary ii, 1910: 

“We submit the following proposition: 

1— The Packard Company to assign to Knight & 
Kilbourne all of its right under the Reeve reissue pat¬ 
ent and to receive as a consideration 5 per cent, of the 
gross royalties derived from licenses under the Knight 
and Reeve patents, plus an amount equal to 75 per 
cent, of all royalties which the Packard Company shall 
have to pay for its licenses under the Knight and 
Reeve patent, the minimum royalty payable to the 
Packard Company under this arrangement to be $10,- 
000 per annum for the first five years or an amount 
equal to the minimum royalty provided in the license 
which the Packard Company shall take under the 
Knight and Reeve patents. 

Or 

2— The Packard Company to assign all of its 
right under the Reeve patent to Knight & Kilbourne 
and to receive 20 per cent, of the gross royalties receiv¬ 
ed by Knight and Kilbourne from licenses under the 
Knight and Reeve patents or any of them; the mini¬ 
mum royalty payable to the Packard Company under 
this arrangement to be $10,000 per annum for five 
years, or an amount equal to the minimum royalty 
which the Packard Company shall be required to pay 
to Kilbourne and Knight by the license under the 
Knight and Reeve patents.” 


132 



On January 14, 1910, Mr. Watson and Mr. Tib¬ 
betts called on Mr. Knight, Mr. Hopkins and I at the 
Herald Square hotel, New York, and endeavored to 
secure further concessions. Mr. Hopkins, meanwhile, 
had made a search which disclosed a number of Amer¬ 
ican anticipations which in his opinion completely de¬ 
stroyed the validity of the Reeve patent, and we there¬ 
fore declined to make any concessions or accede to 
their demands. 

Conference in New York. 

Balked in its attempt to secure a free license and 
a share of American royalties, the Packard Company 
next appeared in the person of Mr. Joy at a confer¬ 
ence in New York which was arranged between 
Knight & Kilbourne and the other companies who, 
together with the Packard Company had been orig¬ 
inally negotiating for the American rights, he having 
been invited, as I am informed, by one of the other 
parties. We had, in the meantime, disclosed to these 
other companies, one of whom had originally invited 
the Packard Company to join in the negotiations for 
the American rights under the Knight patents, what 
had happened with regard to the Reeve patent. At 
this meeting, while Mr. Joy was present, Knight & 
Kilbourne were asked to name a price at which they 
would sell their American patents, which they de¬ 
clined to do. The next we heard from the Packard 
% 

Company was the statement by a representative in 
last week’s Motor Age. I he policy of the Packard 
Company in trying to not only acquire a free license 
under the Knight patents but to make the other man¬ 
ufacturers pay tribute to them through Knight & Kil¬ 
bourne having failed, it has resorted to attempted in- 


133 


timidation. I may say for its information that con¬ 
tracts have been made by Knight & Kilbourne with 
foreign licensees which will bring them an income of 
about $300,000 per year, and I can assure it that such 
part of that amount as may be necessary will be spent 
in protecting their American rights. 

Welcome a Suit. 

In conclusion, I am expressly authorized by 
Knight & Kilbourne to say that they wish to make 
it extremely easy for the Packard Company to carry 
out its implied threat of bringing suit for infringe¬ 
ment, and testing its alleged rights under the Reeve 
reissued patent, and for that purpose they authorize 
me to say on their behalf that they are now and since 
the year 1904 have been continuously engaged in 
manufacturing and selling Knight engines, and since 
July 13, 1909, the date of the Reeve reissued patent, 
have been engaged and are now engaged in manufac¬ 
turing and selling, and since that date have manufac¬ 
tured and sold Knight engines of the type shown by 
the drawings in last week’s Motor Age, and they pro¬ 
pose to continue doing so. That such manufacture 
and sale has been and is now being carried on at 1238 
and 1240 Michigan avenue in the City of Chicago, 
County of Cook and State of Illinois, and in the sev¬ 
enth judicial circuit of the United States, whose courts 
have jurisdiction of patent litigation and infringe¬ 
ments, and at the above address Knight & Kilbourne 
will be pleased to accept service in a suit for infringe¬ 
ment brought by the Packard Company under the 
Reeve reissue patent No. 12,991, and if such suit is 
brought will afford the Packard Company every facil- 


134 


ity in their power to bring same to a speedy hearing 
and determination. I am further authorized to sav 

J 

on behalf of Knight & Kilbou rne that not only is the 
Packard Motor Car Co. invited to bring such a suit, 
but it is challenged to do so, and its failure so to do 
will be construed by Knight & Kilbourne, as it doubt¬ 
less will be by the public, as an admission on its part 
that it has no rights that are being infringed by Knight 
& Kilbourne, and that it has not the courage to pre¬ 
sent such a flimsy case to a court of competent juris¬ 
diction. F. E. LONAS. 

REEVE ANSWER IN THE KNIGHT CASE.* 

Boston, Mass.—Editor Motor Age—There ap¬ 
peared in the columns of Motor Age recently a letter 
on behalf of the manufacturers of the Knight slide- 
valve motor which indicates the existence of a con¬ 
troversy over the claims of the Reeve reissue patent 
No. 12,991. The Packard Motor Car Co. has license 
from us under this patent for certain construction, 
but, as owners of the legal title and of full rights for 
all other uses, we feel impelled to correct what may 
become a wrong impression on the part of those not 
fully informed of the facts as to the validity of the 
patent. 

We obtained this reissue through our regular at¬ 
torney, and'applied for it promptly on discovering the 
grounds for reissuing the original, just as the law re¬ 
quires. We are further able to state that the reissue 
vvas not granted until after a thorough and conscien- 


* Reprint of article in Motor Age of March 10, 
1910. 


135 





tious examination on the part of the patent office offi¬ 
cials, which failed to reveal any participation or other 
reason for denying the claims. 

In the published communication from Mr. 
Knight’s representative certain acts were alleged and 
certain opinions of counsel quoted to give the impres¬ 
sion that a hold-up was being attempted on the basis 
of an improper assertion of claims dominating the use 
of a pair of slide-valves coaxial with the motor piston. 

We have no knowledge of our responsibility for 
the policy which may have been adopted by our 
licensees but we desire to point out what any one may 
ascertain who is sufficiently interested to investigate, 
namely, that Professor Reeve filed his claims in 1901 
for the combination, in a motor, compressor or pump, 
of two co-operating cylindrical or piston slide-valves, 
in one of which the working piston is mounted to re¬ 
ciprocate and his patent as originally issued claimed 
substantially that subject matter. An alleged griev¬ 
ance in any quarter is no warrant for an infringement. 
Although we respect the opinion of so eminent an 
English authority as Dugald Clerk, he is in error as to 
our patent—probably because he is misinformed. So 
far as we are informed by the communication men¬ 
tioned above, or otherwise, no patent or publication 
prior to 1901 anticipates the combination of working 
piston and concentric sliding valves as claimed by 
Reeve. 

It is true that the patent shows several different 
arrangements of valves for compressions, motors, 
etc., including steam engines, and it has been hastily 
alleged by its detractors that the expedients illustrated 
could not be applied to an explosion motor. That, 
however, is an error, for it manifestly is entirely prac- 


136 


ticable to embody the essential elements of the valve 
structure shown and claimed by the patent in a gas 
motor. 

It detracts nothing from an inventor’s rights that 
he has not at once started to manufacture under his. 
patent. Such delay usually happens when one is- 
ahead of the art and, for this reason, many of the most 
valuable patents have not gone into extended use until 
nearly the time of their expiration. It not infre¬ 
quently happens in such cases that later inventors 
suppose, erroneously, that they are entitled to the 
broad idea. 

We take the liberty of asking Motor Age to pub¬ 
lish this statement for the purpose of correcting any 
impression that may have been created to the effect 
that the Reeve reissue patent is not entitled to respect 
as constituting a valid monopoly for what it purports 
to claim.—C. P. Power Co. 

REEVES DIFFERS WITH KNIGHT’S 

ATTORNEY.* 

In The Automobile issue of February iyth, 
Charles Y. Knight, through his attorney, discussed 
the merit of the Reeves Reissue Patent No. 12,99c 
which the Packard Motor Car Company has a license 
to use, and according to the Knight version of this 1 e- 
issue, it is of little value because in the process of ob¬ 
taining a reissue the claims were enlarged and the 
scope of the patent was so alteied that as a reissue it 
is in conflict with court rulings bearing upon this sub¬ 
ject. 

*Reprint of article from i he Automobile, Maich 
17, 1910. 


137 




It is now claimed by the owners of the Reeve Re¬ 
issue Patent, that Dugald Clerk in his discussion of 
the situation failed to consider all the facts and reach¬ 
ed erroneous conclusions in consequence. The Reeves 
representatives go on to say that it is true of the re¬ 
issue that it shows several different arrangements of 
valves for compressors, motors, etc., including steam 
engines, and an examination of the reissue will of 
course show that it differs in material respects from 
the preamble and claims as originally included. The 
Reeves interests are authority for the statement that 
it is entirely practicable to employ the essential ele¬ 
ments of the valve structure, shown and claimed by 
the patent, in a gas engine. The Knight attorneys, 
on the other hand, base their contentions upon the 
rulings of courts, some of which were given in The 
Automobile, and they stoutly maintain that the 
Reeves Reissue is not in conformity with these rul- 
ings. It is anticipated that opportunity will be af¬ 
forded the lawyers on both sides of this situation to 
exercise their talents and acumen. 


SLIDE VALVE ENGINE PATENTS.* 

An Alleged American Anticipation of the Knight 

Engine. 

In the American Motor Age of February ioth, 
just to hand in this country, appears an announce¬ 
ment of considerable importance in relation to the 
Silent Knight engine manufactured in this country by 
the Daimler Motor Company. 

*Reprint of article in Autocar, London, England, 
March 5, 1910. 


138 



1 his is broadly to the effect that an anticipation 
of the Knight engine exists in the U. S. A. in the form 
of an American patent to S. A. Reeve, reissue No. 12- 
99 R <ok 1 dated 1901, and that the Knight engine is 
held to infringe this patent in America, which is stated 
to he owned by the Packard Motor Company, one of 
the largest American manufacturers. 

d he patent in question is a long one, with a large 
number of illustrations and claims. We give here¬ 
with a short description of one of the most pertinent 
constructions, with longitudinal sectional views. The 
actual construction illustrated is that of a steam en¬ 
gine, but the specification states that the invention is 
applicable to motors broadly, so that it would appar¬ 
ently include petrol engines. The construction is as 
follows: 



In a casing A is arranged a sliding sleeve or cyl¬ 
inder B, the" sleeve being guided by hollow rings C. 
These rings divide the casing into end Chambers D, 
to each of which live steam is admitted by the pipe E. 
The sliding cylinder B is provided with yielding cover 
plates E, which are backed up by springs F, but can 
be held rigidly in position by means of mechanically 
operated toggle links G. The hollow rings C form 
exhaust passages and communicate with the interior 


139 




















of the cylinder B by means of ports H. The working 
piston J slides to and fro in the sliding cylinder B to¬ 
gether with the piston rod K. At each end of the 
sliding cylinder are formed inlet ports F, which can be 
covered by movable rings or valve sleeves M. As the 
piston moves back, say, to the left, the cushioning of 
the steam in the end of the cylinder forces the valve 
cover E to the left, compressing the spring F and 
closing the toggle links as shown. The valve moves 
further than the position illustrated, so as to uncover 
the inlet ports L. Fresh steam is admitted from the 



Fig. 2.—Exhausting on right side of 
piston J. 

Fig. 3.—Admission of steam through 
ports L, exhaust H being closed. 

Fig. 4.—Inlets ports L closed by ring M, 
expansion taking place. 


valve chests D through these ports (see Fig. 3) and 
forces the piston J outwards, the cylinder B also mov¬ 
ing outwards together with the valve cover E, which 
moves under the action of the spring F. After a little 
movement of the parts in this direction the ports F 
approach the ring M, which, by a suitable mechanism, 
is then moving in the opposite direction. The result 
is that the ring M covers the ports F and cuts off 
the admission of steam (Fig. 4). The piston con¬ 
tinues to travel outwards under the influence of the 
steam in the cylinder, the exhaust ports H not being 
in communication with the exhaust.chamber C because 
the cylinder B is moved too far over to the right, as 
shown in Fig. 4. On the return stroke the cylinder is 
moved back into the exhaust position shown in Fig. 


140 




2, in which the exhaust ports H coincide with the 
exhaust chambers C. 

d lie same operation is effected on both sides of 
the piston, the engine being a double-acting one. 

The inventor states in his specifications: “I be¬ 
lieve myself to be the first to provide a combination 
of a main working piston reciprocating in a cylinder 
and two or more co-axial and co-operating valves, at 
least one of which surrounds the piston and may con¬ 
stitute the cylinder barrel, these valves being prefer¬ 
ably both non-seating valves sliding axially on each 
other. I also believe myself to be the first to provide 
a sleeve valve telescoped with the cylinder casing and 
with a cylinder head or other cylindrical member in¬ 
ternal to the sleeve valve, the sleeve valve having - a 
movement relative to the working piston and con¬ 
trolling communication with the cylinder space.” 

It is difficult to state the bearing of this Ameri¬ 
can specification on the Knight British patents with¬ 
out thorough investigation, but it is possible that it 
will have the effect of narrowing the claims. The 
Knight engine is at present controlled in this country 
by two patents, No. 14,720 of 1905 and No. 12,355 °f 
1908. The first of these is claimed to be a master pat¬ 
ent, but it is extremely doubtful whether its scope can 
be considered .to be of any great importance. Cer¬ 
tainly the United States specification referred to 
shows that it has been proposed, prior to the first 
Knight patent, to use sliding cylindrical valves for 
admission and exhaust purposes, and to arrange these 
calves to move in opposite directions to effect quick 
cut-off, as is the case with the valves L and M referred 
to above. The second Knight patent does not seem to 
he of very material importance in view of the fact that 


141 


illustrated descriptions of the Knight engine were 
published before the patent was applied for. The re¬ 
sult has been that the second patent is limited to such 
few details as were not published in the previous de¬ 
scriptions. 

This American patent will probably be of some 
importance in America, as it would seem that the 
Knight construction may infringe some of the claims, 
the more important of which read as follows: 

“No. 36. The combination of a casing, a recip¬ 
rocating piston and two cylindrical valves surround¬ 
ing the piston and operating one upon the other. 

‘‘No. 39. The combination of an axially movable 
cylinder valve, a piston reciprocating therein, a sleeve 
valve movable on the outside of the cylinder valve." 


SLIDE VALVE ENGINE PATENTS*. 

Mr. C. Y. Knight on the Alleged American Antici¬ 
pation. 

Last week we gave some particulars of an al¬ 
leged anticipation of the Knight engine in the United 
States, as the Packard Motor Company had acquired 
the Reeve steam engine patent and held that the 
Knight patent was an infringement of it. It should be 
clearly understood that this claim has not been le¬ 
gally substantiated. It is merely a claim made by 
the Packard Company, who appear to have unearthed 
this Reeve patent with the idea of using it as a means 
for obtaining a better bargain with the owners of the 
Knight patents, as the Packard Company are desir- 

♦Reprint of article from Autocar, London, Eng¬ 
land, March 12, 1910. 


142 



ous of obtaining a license to make slide valve engines 
under the Knight patents in the United States. Mr. 
Knight himself deals with the question so fully that 
it is hardly necessary for us to make any comment, 
though we do not think it is out of place to point out 
that the alleged anticipation of the Knight-Daimler 
engine is a mere papei invention which would never 
work as an internal combustion engine. In fact, we 
question whether it could be made to function as a 
steam engine, though it might possibly be run at slow 
speeds. Another very significant feature of the at¬ 
tempt to put forward the Reeve patent as an anticipa¬ 
tion of the Knight is found in the fact that in his orie- 
inal patent Reeve’s idea of one of its principal ad¬ 
vantages was that it enabled eccentrics to be elimi¬ 
nated for operating the valves. This shows very plainly 
what was in the mind of the inventor Reeve, although 
in the reissue it is stated that the wonderful advantage 
of the elimination of the eccentrics has been omitted. 

A word of explanation is necessary in regard to 
“reissues.” In America, if a patentee finds that his 
patent is invalid or his specification contains mistakes, 
he cannot amend as is the case in his country, but must 
apply to the Patent Office for his original patent to 
cease and for a new patent to issue in its place. Fur¬ 
ther, if an inventor should find that he has omitted 
to claim a feature in the original specification to which 
he is entitled, he can insert such a claim in his reissued 
patent. 

In the present case it appears that a claim has 
been inserted in the reissued patent which was not in 
the original, such claim being alleged to cover the 
Knight engine. Mr. Knight maintains that the re¬ 
issue is invalid, and that the claim or claims inserted 


M3 


cannot be substantiated, which really are matters 
which do not affect either the Knight patents here nor 
the use of the Knight engines in England, though, of 
course, these matters are of importance in America.. 

There are many other points upon which we might 
dwell, but the situation will be found to be reviewed 
so thoroughly by Mr. Knight himself that there is 
no need for us to explain it further. 

All that we need do is to repeat that an abridge¬ 
ment of the original Knight patent was published in 
The Autocar of October 31, 1908, while the later pat¬ 
ent which covers a number of improvements con¬ 
tained in the present Daimler engine was published 
in our columns on June 12, 1909, as follows: 

“An internal combustion engine working on the 
four-stroke cycle, comprising a cylinder and two in¬ 
ternal sleeves with cylinder and sleeves being provid- 
ed with ports arranged at the combustion end of the 
engine, the ports being opened and closed when re¬ 
quired by positively moving the sleeves, the whole of 
the required port motion being obtained without the 
use of port, traversed by the piston.” 

It will be noticed that the above claim is very 
broad, covering as it does all internal combustion en¬ 
gines of sleeve type which omit the lower port which 
is traversed by the piston. Broad as this claim is r 
however, it only relates to an improvement, as em¬ 
bodied in a special or particular model, as the essen¬ 
tial features of the engine are covered by Knight’s 
earlier patent of 1905, which broadly covers all four¬ 
cycle engines employing sleeves for valving purposes, 
regardless of the number of sleeves, or whether they 
are internal or external to the cylinder. 

In conclusion, we should say that the documen¬ 
tary evidence, patents, etc., referred to by Mr. Knight 


144 


have been submitted to us for our inspection, and that 
Messis. Knight and Kilbourne, the owners of the 
Ivnight patent, have challenged the Packard Co. to 
take legal steps to substantiate their claims. 

Mr. Knight's communication on the subject is as 
follows: 

hi last week s issue The Autocar gave space 
to an editorial article on page 321 under the heading 
Slide A alve Engine Patents: An Alleged American 
Anticipation of the Knight Engine/ publishing in this 
article certain hastily-drawn conclusions based upon 
drawings from a United States patent issued to S. A. 
Reeve in 1908, reissued in 1909, and now the property 
of the Packard Motor Car Co., of Detroit, Mich., U. 
S. A., the leading builders of high-class cars of 
America. 

The Alleged Anticipation. 

“So far as the patent in question is concerned, I 
need only call the attention of the reader to the fact 
that the claims which The Autocar printed in con¬ 
nection therewith, and which purport to cover the 
Knight engine, were conceived and placed on record 
five years after the Knight American application was 
filed, and four years after the British patent was grant¬ 
ed ! What is more, these claims are acknowledged 
by their authors to have been based upon the the per¬ 
fected Knight motor as produced by the Daimler Co., 
purchased by the Packard Motor Car Co. in 1908, 
for testing purposes in connection with their nego¬ 
tiations for an American license, and that the claims 
were expressly drawn to cover such motor. 


145 


The Early Negotiations. 


“When the acquisition of the Knight motor by the 
Daimler Co. was made known in England eighteen 
months ago, negotiations were entered into between 
ourselves and four leading American firms for the 
American rights. Three out of these four sent their 
chief engineers across to Coventry to investigate per¬ 
sonally the claims made for the motor, and all these 
reported favorably to their companies. The Packard 
Co. was one of these four, and their chief engineer, in 
the person of Mr. Russell Huff, twice in the interests 
of his company visited the writer at the Daimler 
Works—once in 1908 and once in 1909. In the fall 
of 1908 arrangements were made with the Daimler 
Co. by which each of the four concerns were permitted 
to purchase a 38 h. p. motor for testing purposes, and 
Mr. Huff in particular was given the freedom of the 
works by the Daimler Co. at my request, and all in¬ 
formation of a technical character desired was fur¬ 
nished him even to the analysis of the iron from which 
the sleeves of the Knight motor are made. This was 
all given in confidence as a matter of course, with the 
understanding that the Packard Co. were interested 
in becoming one of the four American licensees, and 
there was no indication that thev were acting - other 
than in good faith.” 

Later Developments. 

“In October last, however, Mr. Kilbourne and our 
American solicitor, Mr. Lonas, were summoned to 
Detroit by the manager of the Packard Co. for the 
stated purpose of taking up the negotiations, that com¬ 
pany having had almost a year of time in which to 
test the 38 h. p. Daimler-built engine. When they ar- 


146 


rived at the Packard Works they were met by Messrs. 

1 ibbetts and Watson, patent attorneys for the Pack¬ 
ard Co., who informed them that they had brought 
up a United States patent for a steam engine, which 
patent was applied for in 1901, and granted in 1908, 
and had had this steam engine patent reissued to cover 
the use in America of the double sleeve as employed 
by the Knight motor. They did not claim that this 
was a patent under which an engine similar to the 
Knight could be built, or that their patent was prac¬ 
ticable for any sort of internal-combustion engine, but 
that by re-drafting the steam engine claims they had 
so worded them that they could make trouble for 
Knight and Kilbourne in America. 

Subsequent Investigations. 

“Subsequent investigation upon our part revealed 
the fact that as soon as the Packard Company opened 
negotiations in 1908 for an American license, one of 
its patent experts was sent to Washington to search 
the patent records for some sort of information which 
would afford the company grounds upon which to get 
Knight and Kilbourne within its power and enable it 
to control the introduction of the Knight engine in 
America, in his search this agent, Tibbetts, came 
across a patent, No. 880,824, applied for by Sidney A. 
Reeve, September 20, 1901, covering a valve mechan¬ 
ism ‘for engines and compressors,' in which the or¬ 
dinary steam piston worked in an open end cylinder, 
which Reeve, in his original patent described as a ‘bar¬ 
rel valve,’ which had ports at each end, the said ports 
being opened and closed through the movement of the 
valve by the friction of the piston. The valve en¬ 
closed at either end of a piston valve, described 


147 


by Reeve as ‘discharge valves,’ which moved auto- 
maticallv, and on the outside of the sleeve were two 
annular valves for cut-off purposes, used as governors, 
being in shape narrow rings. The device had never 
been built even experimentally as a steam engine, 
and two of its claimed leading and novel features upon 
which the original patent was issued were the claim 
(i) that it was as a valve mechanism ‘worked without 
the use of eccentrics or other positive means,’ and (2) 
that the piston valves were so actuated as to make it 
impossible, because of their movability, for the en¬ 
gine to be damaged through water which might con¬ 
dense in the pipes and flow to the cylinder. 

The Reissued Reeve Patent. 

“The Packard attorneys agreed with Reeve to 
purchase rights under this patent, provided a re-issue 
could be had which would at least in words cover the 
Knight engine. By having before them the Knight 
engine sent over by the Daimler Co. and carefully 
studying its construction and operation, these attor¬ 
neys, Watson and Tibbetts, proceeded to re-write the 
Reeve patent. That part which Reeve in his original 
described as a ‘discharge valve,’ Watson and Tibbetts, 
in order to establish a semblance to the Knight motor, 
described as a ‘head’; the narrow rings which Reeve 
had called ‘annular’ or ‘ring valves,’ Watson and Tib¬ 
betts stretched through language into ‘sleeves.’ All 
claims to the novelty of a valve gear ‘working inde¬ 
pendent of eccentrics or other positive means’ were 
left out, because that would have revealed the original 
and real intention of Reeve, who had not the slight¬ 
est idea of inventing a petrol motor. Some forty-seven 
new claims were drawn, all based upon the effort to 


v 


148 


transform a ‘ring-' into a ‘sleeve,’ and a ‘movable valve’ 
into a ‘fixed head.’ 

How the Reissue Passed the Patent Examiners. 

“Inasmuch as there was no suggestion of any in¬ 
tent to cover its use as an internal-combustion en¬ 
gine, the application for the reissue never came under 
the observation of the patent examiners in the division 
of internal-combustion engines. When Knight and 
Ivilbourne asked what they (the Packard Co.) pro¬ 
posed in the premises, they answered that they would 
demand a half interest in the American royalties for 
the Knight motor. This was rejected at once. Then, 
after some weeks of reflection and the perusal of sev¬ 
eral opinions from patent experts regarding the va¬ 
lidity and scope of the Reeve patent, their attorney, 
Watson, submitted the following proposition to 
Knight and Kilbourne, January u, 1910: 

“We submit the following proposition : 

T. The Packard Company to assign to Knight 
and Kilbourne all of its rights under the Reeve reissue 
patent, and to receive as a consideration 5 per cent, 
of the gross royalties derived from licenses under the 
Knight and Reeve patents, plus an amount equal to 
75 per cent, of all royalties which the Packard Com¬ 
pany shall have to pay for its licenses under the Knight 
and Reeve patents, the minimum royalty payable to 
the Packard Company under this arrangement to be 
$10,000 per annum for the first five years, or an amount 
equal to the minimum royalty provided in the license 
which the Packard Company shall take under the 
Knight and Reeve patents. 

Or— 

‘2. The Packard Company to assign all of its 
right under the Reeve patent to Knight and Kilbourne, 
and to receive 20 per cent, of the gross royalties re¬ 
ceived by Knight and Kilbourne fiom licenses undei 
the Knight and Reeve patents or any of them ; the 


149 



minimum royalty payable to the Packard Company 
under this arrangement to be $10,000 per annum for 
five years, or an amount equal to the minimum royalty 
which the Packard Company shall be required to pay 
Kilbourne and Knight by the license under the Knight 
and Reeve patents.’ 

These propositions were promptly rejected by 
Knight and Kilbourne through their attorney, Mr. F. 
E. Lonas, and negotiations with the Packard Co. 
broken off. 

Scope of the Reeve Patent. 

“Had Knight and Kilbourne considered for one 
moment that what was offered them was what it pur¬ 
ported to be—a bona fide basic patent covering their 
construction or even strengthening their claims in 
America—they would certainly have been very un¬ 
wise to have rejected the Packard proposition, which 
also carried with it the understanding that they were 
to pioneer the introduction of the Knight motor in the 
United States, insuring the ready placing of the re¬ 
maining available licenses. 

“The proposition was rejected, because we were 
assured first, by Mr. Dugald Clerk, after a careful 
search and review of the situation, that our rights were 
in no wise affected by the said Reeve patent as re¬ 
issued, and his opinion was unqualifiedly corroborated 
later by our own and several other American solicitors 
after several weeks of exhaustive search in connec¬ 
tion with the case. 

A Rule or Ruin Policy. 

“When their propositions were rejected the Pack¬ 
ard Co. resorted to the rule or ruin policy of publishing 
the statement that the Reeve steam engine patent. 



which they had bought up and reissued, controlled 
the side valve situation in America. 

AY'hat is this Reeve patent, and what is a re¬ 
issue?’ the reader naturally inquires. 

“The Reeve patent purports to cover a type of 
slide valve steam engine quite common in the Patent 
Office. His original claims must have been very nar¬ 
row, because there are many other steam construc¬ 
tions anticipating him by years which employ every 
single feature which he claims to be novel to his con¬ 
struction in the reissued patent! 

“A ‘reissue’ in America is a process under the 
American law, by which an inventor, after his patent 
has issued, can amend it to cover errors or to make 
more clear his original intentions. 

“The courts have uniformly held that this right 
did not extend to a right to so redraft the patent as to 
cover the intervening right of some other inventor, 
nor could it be employed for speculative purposes. 
In the case of the Reeve reissue the Knight engine 
had been on the market, fully advertised, and in the 
hands of the public from three to four years before it 
ever occurred to Reeve, who had never built even a 
model of his "own invention, that his steam engine 
patent applied for in 1901, and issued in 1908, might 
be so worded by amendment as to cover on paper and 
possibly absorb the fruits of years of labor and a for¬ 
tune in money expended by another to produce some¬ 
thing which had proven practical and a great success 
which he never had dreamed of, and to which his con¬ 
struction was wholly and admittedly unsuited and im¬ 
possible. 


The Limitations of a Reissue . 

“No person can go into the Patent Office with a 
drawing prima facie impractical and either directly 
or in an amendment secure valid claims to cover 
something different. This is what the Packard Co. 
in America have attempted in their manipulation of 
the Reeve patent. First, prima facie the Reeve con¬ 
struction is impractical for an internal combustion en¬ 
gine, if not, in fact, a steam engine, and in his original 
claims he never suggested, nor was his patent drawn 
in a manner to show he ever expected, it could be 
used for internal combustion purposes. And when 
the Packard Co.'s attorneys reconstructed this patent 
through ingeniously worded claims and veiled designs 
eight years after it was filed, the most they expected 
to accomplish was to take advantage of its specifica¬ 
tions to secure allowances which would bring some 
features of the Knight engine into conflict, so that 
through threats of prolonged litigation they might 
secure control at terms dictated by themselves of the 
Knight interests in the United States. If these re¬ 
issued patents were basic and legitimately secured, 
and an internal-combustion engine could be built un¬ 
der them why negotiate with Knight and Kilbourne 
at all? Why offer to permit the Knight patents to 
absorb from 80 to 95 per cent, of the American royal¬ 
ties, aside from these accruing from the payments of 
the Packard Co.? 

“The English reader is not particularly interested 
in the details of the methods employed by Packard 
agents in securing the reissue of the Reeve patent, or 
how it was accomplished without coming under the 
observation of the examiners in the department of in¬ 
ternal-combustion engines, nor is it particularly per- 


tment here to go into the mystifying ramifications of 
patent law and technical verbiage bearing upon the 
relations of these patents to each other. More than 
a dozen patent drawings similar to the Reeve have 
been public property for ten to thirty years. Dur- 
ing the past five years something like twenty pat¬ 
ents have been granted in various leading countries 
to Knight and Kilbourne covering the Knight com¬ 
bination for internal-combustion engines, and in no 
single instance has one of these patents been cited in 
conflict. It is customary in the United States to keep 
patents unissued in the office as long as practicable in 
order to have all necessary time for perfecting the 
construction and strengthening the claims where pos¬ 
sible. T he famous Selden patent covering the entire 
motor car in America was thus held for ten years; the 
Reeve patent itself was filed in 1901 and not issued 
until 1908. 

The Knight Patent. 

“Broad claims completely protecting the Knight 
motor as now built have been allowed by the United 
States Patent Office for nearly five years; the Reeve 
patent has been published two years; also the Knight 
motor and its principles have been widely advertised 
and made known as broadly as possible in mechanical 
circles. Yet there has been no suggestion from the 
United States patent authorities, familiar with the 
claims of both constructions that the Knight petrol 
engine structure infringed the Reeve steam engine. 
During this time experts for at least ten important 
motor concerns have searched the patent records of 
the various countries for anticipations of the Knight 
patents without success. Knight and Kilbourne have 


i53 


spent thousands of pounds to acquaint themselves 
with the true state of the art, throughout the world, ' 
and, basing their confidence upon the reports of the 
best patent experts in the various countries, have noti¬ 
fied the Packard Co. of America that not only will 
they make it extremely easy for the owners of the 
Reeve patent to get the matter before the proper 
court, but have in the public prints of America chal¬ 
lenged them to bring suit, suggesting in such chal¬ 
lenge that their failure to promptly do so would be ac¬ 
cepted by Knight and Kilbourne, and doubtless by 
the public, as evidence of their lack of courage to pre¬ 
sent such a flimsy case to a court of competent juris¬ 
diction 

“In conclusion, it may be stated that inasmuch 
as Reeve does not claim to cover even in his reissue 
the elements necessary for the construction of an in¬ 
ternal combustion engine, but only certain features,, 
which, even if valid in America, are of no importance 
abroad, because no such rights are claimed by any¬ 
body outside of the United States, anything done or 
said in this connection has no bearing whatever upon 
this side.” 


% 


i54 


Supplementary to 
Pamphlet 

The Knight Engine 

and 


The Packard Motor 
. Car Company 
































































V‘ 



















PACKARD MOTOR CAR COMPANY. 

Detroit, Mich., U. S. A., May io, 1910. 

Mr. F. E. Lonas, 

Care Knight & Kilbourne, 

Chicago, Illinois. 

My Dear Sir : 

I am advised that your people have published and 
sent out a pamphlet entitled “ 1 he Knight Engine and 
the Packard Company. Will you kindly send me 
some copies? 

I regret that you feel so annoyed at the Packard 
Company about the Reeve Patent situation as indi¬ 
cated by your article in a recent issue of the “Motor 
Age.” 

We h ave been asked from time to time by various 
parties about the Knight motor, and stories have been 
so industriously circulated that we were going to use 
the Knight motor as soon as we could get to making 
them, and the facts being to the contrary, I was asked 
by our Vice-President, Mr. S. D. Waldon, if he should 
say anything in regard to the situation. I advised 
him that I saw no reason why he should not make a 
statement of thp facts. 

This was done to the representative of “Motor 
Age,” among others, and an article was written up 
around the brief facts. 

Your people took exception to the matter, but 
there were so many misstatements and falsehoods in 
circulation with regard to the situation that a simple 
statement of the facts seemed the proper thing to 
make. Whenever I see you I can certainly make clear 
to you that there was and is no animosity on our part, 
and no intent on the part of the Packard Motor Car 


i57 


Company to do an injustice to anybody, as we see it. 

I rather feel that the injustice possibly is on the other 
side. 

We certainly are not to blame that Mr. Reeve 
made this invention in 1901. This Company does not 
believe in doing injustice to anybody, nor does it be¬ 
lieve in having injustice done to it. This attitude, I 
am sure, you will yourself fully approve of. We feel 
that it is always at all times proper to tell the exact 
facts and state the pure unadulterated truth. 

Again, please permit me to express to you my re¬ 
gret for having taken any step which has annoyed you 
so much as this seems to have done, but it could not 
well be avoided. 

The attack upon this Company in “Motor Age” 
is, of course, unwarranted and greatly at variance 
with the facts and the exact history of the negotia¬ 
tions, which is, of course, always unfortunate. 

We wish we could see the value of the Knight in- 
ventions through the same rose-colored glasses as 
yourselves. We hope we may be able to in the future, 
but our most diligent experimental efforts, at great 
expense, so far have been unavailing. 

We are always glad to co-operate.with an inven¬ 
tor in aiding the development of his ideas and we took 
hold of vour matters with free and unbiased minds, 
and spent our time and money and have not been able 
to set our stamp of approval on the Knight ideas, re¬ 
gardless of patents or rates of royalties. 

Now through the development of the Reeve Pat¬ 
ent on double sliding sleeve valves, and also the ob¬ 
vious weakness of the Knight motor situation as to 

o 

its patentable features being so extremely limited 
through the rejection by the United States Patent 


Office of the double sliding sleeve valve features, due 
to the illustration and description of it in “Motor 
Age,” October 26, 1905, more than two years before 
Mr. Knight filed his application for patent thereon, 
the patent situation in the United States is different 
from that which we supposed it was when we first 
took up the matter a year or more ago, and bought 
from you your English-Daimler motor for study. 

It is clear that so far as the patent situation goes, 
the Reeve Patent and the Knight pending Patent ap¬ 
plications are both necessary to any sort of patent 
control of the so-called Knight motor. 

It must also be clear to you that our inability to 
find in the Knight-Daimler motor the “wonder of the 
aee” in motors as you view it, had led us to be unable 
to meet your views. \\ e are acting according to the 
light we have. 

Our motor car manufacturers have had some bit¬ 
ter and expensive experience with American legal 
processes in patent litigation, and we are naturally 
wary of how we load up on expensive royalties with¬ 
out getting any protection in return, and especially 
in these times of increasing competition. 

The suggested royalty basis which you proposed 
for a 30 H. P. size of motor was approximately $100 
per motor. That would be an added cost of making 
of our motor of say 20 per cent, and in motors of ap¬ 
proximately similar sizes manufactuied by paits 
makers for cheaper cars would be an increase in mo¬ 
tor cost of say 50 per cent, both of which would be 
prohibitive and absurd, even if the motoi was the 

“wonder of this wonderful age.” 

No manufacturer of motor cars could in Ins right 

mind add to his burden of costs any such amount for 


159 


something which would not in our judgment do the 
work required by the user of a motor vehicle any bet¬ 
ter or in any more satisfactory manner than the work 
is now being done by the present world’s standard 
form of poppet valve motor. 

The user would have to be asked to pay an added 
price to get mechanical features which would have no 
observable superiority and would incidentally have 
many objectionable features, both from a shop point 
of view as well as the user’s viewpoint, which have 
been already eliminated from our Packard motor and 
others, as for example: 

One of the tests has been to run the motor with¬ 
out water until it sticks or without sufficient lubrica¬ 
tion until the same result occurs. These forms of 
neglect and carelessness of operation often occur, and 
in the Packard type of motor as soon as it has cooled 
off, water and oil can be replenished and the car is 
again ready for the road, whereas, in the English- 
Daimler Knight type of motor the sticking of the pis¬ 
tons and sleeves reduces the engine to a state of 
wreckage necessitating towing it to a repair shop and 
extensive and expensive replacement of broken parts. 

I only mention this as one of the several serious 
points of trouble. Difficulty of proper lubrication 
might be mentioned as equally important, but it is not 
necessary to argue the many details. 

Please kindly send me some of the pamphlets 
which I have heard you are sending out so that I may 
know what is going on. 

Yours very truly, 

(Signed) HENRY B. JOY, 

President. 


160 


Chicago, May 16, 1910. 




Henry B. Joy, Esq., 

Pres. Packard Motor Car Company, 

Detroit, Mich. 

Dear Sir : 

In reply to your favor of the 10th instant, I note 
your expression of regret at having, as you state it, 
‘‘annoyed me,” but I beg to assure you that the indig¬ 
nation which I naturally felt at the action of the Pack¬ 
ard Motor Car Company, after failing in its efforts to 
sell Knight & Kilbourne the worthless Reeve patent, 
into which it had unsuccessfully attempted to incor¬ 
porate claims covering the Knight invention by the 
use of confidential information give it by them, in at¬ 
tempting to intimidate those negotiating for licenses 
to manufacture Knight engines in the United States 
by the publication of February 10th, in Motor Age, 
was quickly followed by amusement at the amateur¬ 
ish and ineffective manner in which that attempt was 
made, and its evident inability to make any reply to 
my answer of February 17th, in the same publication. 

If your company had confined itself to a state¬ 
ment that it did not intend to adopt the Knight engine 
there would have been no occasion for my reply, but . 
when the statement was made that it controlled basic 
patents covering slide valve or double sleeve valve 
motors; that the Knight motor was an infringement, 
and that any patents Knight might obtain would 
necessarily be subordinate to the Reeve patent, I 
thought it necessary to give the public the truth re¬ 
garding the entire matter. 

Your effort to convey the impression that the 
publication of February 10th was intended only to 
stop gossip as to your adoption of the Knight engine 

161 


I cannot permit to go unchallenged. What you were 
very obviously trying to do was to intimidate others 
who might desire to adopt the Knight engine which 
you had unsuccessfully attempted to secure by palm¬ 
ing off on Knight & Kilbourne a worthless patent for 
a steam engine, which your attorneys admitted had 
never been built and which they further admitted 
could probably not be used at all in constructing a 
successful combustion engine. Your intention to try 
to intimidate those desiring to adopt the Knight en¬ 
gine is further evidenced by your recent letters to 
some of those with whom we have been negotiating, 
containing veiled threats of suits for infringement. I 
do not believe this will scare anybody in view of the 
fact that you have not had the courage to sue Knight 
& Kilbourne for infringement, as you were challenged 
to do by my letter of February 17th, published in the 
Motor Age. I quite appreciate the reasons for your 
discretion in keeping out of a fight where you know 
you will lose, but do you not think that that sort of 
tactics has reached a point where it will no longer 
serve a useful purpose? 

I11 reply to your statement that the Packard Mo¬ 
tor Car Company does not intend to do an injustice to 
anybody, and that you do not see that you have done 
an injustice to anybody, I must say that you are either 
woefully ignorant of the facts, or your moral eye¬ 
sight is very defective. I should prefer to believe that 
the former is true, and that you have not been given 
all the facts by those acting for you. 

I note your statement, “This company does not 
believe in doing injustice to anybody, nor does it be¬ 
lieve in having injustice done to it. * * * We 

feel that it is always at all times proper to tell the 


exact facts and state the pure unadulterated truth.” 
You are right in assuming that I fully approve of such 
sentiments. I regret to say, however, that candor 
compels me to inform you that in its dealings with 
Knight & Kilbourne your company has not followed 
the code of ethics laid down by you. Ethics, like all 
other rules, are only useful when observed, and no 
amount of profession can atone for failure to practice 
them. 

You say, “The attack upon this company in Mo¬ 
tor Age is, of course, unwarranted and greatly at 
variance with the facts and the exact history of the 
negotiations, which is, of course, always unfortunate.” 
I am greatly surprised that you should make such a 
statement. How you can designate as an “attack” 
the action of one who is himself attacked, as we were 
in this instance, and defends himself by a statement 
of the truth, I cannot understand. Wherein this so- 
called “attack” was unwarranted and at variance with 
the facts, I challenge you to point out. If you can 
show anything in my statement which is either un¬ 
warranted or at variance with the facts or exact his¬ 
tory of the negotiation, I shall be only too glad to cor¬ 
rect it and make all amends in my power. 

It is my invariable practice in all transactions to 
adhere strictly to the facts, and my training has been 
such as to make me very careful in collecting and pre¬ 
serving evidence of the facts as they transpire in all 
important negotiations. That practice was followed 
in this instance, and I am, therefore, very certain that 
upon careful investigation you will find that I have 
confined myself strictly to the facts and the truth. My 
statement is largely based upon documentary evi¬ 
dence and data concerning which there can be no 


question. I do not, however, profess to be infallible, 
and if you can point out any statement of mine that 
is incorrect, I shall be only too glad to correct it. 

You state, “We certainly are not to blame that 
Mr. Reeve made his invention in 1901.” We are not 
blaming you for any invention that Reeve made in 
1901, but for the attempted appropriation of the 
Knight invention which Reeve only discovered in 
1909, when it was disclosed to him by your attorneys, 
Messrs. Watson & Tibbetts. Both of these gentle¬ 
men explicitly admitted to Mr. Kilbourne, Mr. Hop¬ 
kins and I that the Reeve patent was discovered by 
Mr. Tibbetts in his search in the United States Patent 
Office at Washington, and that they then hunted up 
Mr. Reeve, told him if he would apply for and secure 
a reissue of his patent with claims which they would 
prepare, they would purchase from him the United 
States right for internal combustion engine; that an 
agreement to that effect was made with Reeve. The 
reissue was applied for within two months after the 
return of your Chief Engineer from a visit to Eng¬ 
land, where he obtained a large amount of confiden¬ 
tial information as to the construction and merits of 
the Knight engine from Mr. Knight and the Daimler 
Motor Company, and within one month after the re¬ 
ceipt of a Knight engine shipped you by the Daimler 
Motor Company. 

Messrs. Watson & Tibbetts further admitted that 
the claims which they prepared, and which were sub¬ 
sequently incorporated in the Reeve reissue, were 
prepared by them with the express object of covering 
the Knight engine, and they expressed themselves the 
belief that they did cover it. When Mr. Hopkins told 
them that a mere statement of such an admission bv 

J 


them to a court would be sufficient to enlist the svm- 
pathy of the court on behalf of the inventor of the 
Knight engine, and result in their defeat, they ad¬ 
mitted it and said that while the Reeve reissue was 
not strong in their hands it would be strong in the 
hands of Knight & Kilbourne, and a very effective 
weapon against others. They further indicated the 
weakness of the position of your company by reduc¬ 
ing the amount asked for the Reeve patent from fifty 
per cent of the gross United States royalties of the 
combined Knight and Reeve patents to ten per cent, 
but we were subsequently informed by them that you, 
on behalf of the Packard Motor Car Company, de¬ 
manded in addition a free license to manufacture 
Knight engines. It is needless to say that had they 
or you had any confidence in the validity of the Reeve 
reissue and its control of sleeve valve engines in the 
United States, you would not have been trying to 
sell it to us for ten per cent or fifty per cent, under 
such circumstances you would probably consider you 
were very generous if you offered us ten per cent of 
the combined royalty. 

Since we terminated the negotiations by refusing 
your proposal-to sell us the Reeve patent, Brown & 
Hopkins have made a complete investigation of the 
entire matter, and we now know what we did not at 
first know, that the Reeve reissue is absolutely worth¬ 
less. It would not even have made a respectable 
scarecrow. 

1 note the implied invitation in your letter to 
reopen negotiations for the purchase of the Reeve 
patent, but in view of the fact that we are not in the 
waste paper business, I do not know any use we could 
make of it. 


165 


I shall not attempt to make any decisions for the 
United States Patent Office, as your patent counsel 
seem disposed to do, in advance of action on the pend¬ 
ing applications for patents covering the Knight in¬ 
ventions, but I may tell you that this phase of the 
matter is not giving me nearly so much uneasiness as 
it appears to be giving you. 

On the question of royalties, I must also put you 
right. You say our proposed royalty basis is approxi¬ 
mately one hundred dollars per motor for a thirty 
horse power motor. There is an error of only forty 
dollars in the statement, the actual figure being sixty 
dollars. If, as you state, one hundred dollars would 
add twenty per cent to the cost of your motor, its pres¬ 
ent cost is five hundred dollars. The cost of our thirty- 
eight horse power motor, including royalty, would 
not be more than five hundred and thirty dollars, and 
with the superior methods of manufacture and larger 
output in American factories, it would probably cost 
considerably less. When with this fact is taken into 
consideration the further fact that our motor of a 
given size gives about twenty-five per cent more 
power than a poppet valve motor it will be apparent 
that the additional cost of paying a royalty to us is 
entirely wiped out. But this is not all. Our royalty 
proposal for the United States, on the basis of the 
production of the Packard Motor Car Company for 
the coming year, as given to me by Mr. Tibbetts, for 
your large cars, would figure less than forty-five dol¬ 
lars each, which would result in a saving over your 
present cost, leaving out of consideration the in¬ 
creased horse power that the Knight engine is capable 
of continuously developing. 


This brings me to a consideration of the only re¬ 
maining and probably most interesting point in your 
letter, the merit of the Ivnight engine as compared 
with the Packard engine. At the outset I must con¬ 
fess to a considerable degree of surprise at the state¬ 
ments made by you with reference to the merits of 
the Knight engine. First, because it is at variance 
with statements made to me by your Vice-President, 
Mr. Waldon, your Chief Engineer, Mr. Huff, and the 
statements of Mr. Huff to Mr. Knight and others. 
Second, because it is entirely inconsistent with the 
attitude of your company in trying so hard to secure 
a license from Knight and Kilbourne with the Reeve 
patent as partial payment. Under these circum¬ 
stances I am constrained to believe that the views for 
the first time expressed in your letter of the ioth, as 
to the merits of the Knight engine, may be a case of 
“sour grapes.” 

An additional reason for my surprise is that I 
know you are aware that the four leading automobile 
manufacturers of Germany, France, England and Bel¬ 
gium, viz., Daimler Motoren Gesselschaft of Unter- 
Turkheim, Germany, manufacturers of the celebrated 
“Mercedes” cars; Panhard & Levassor of Paris; 
Daimler Motor Co. of England, and the Minerva 
Company of Antwerp, Belgium, have, after an ex¬ 
haustive investigation and tests, adopted the Knight 
motor, and that two of them are now using it exclu¬ 
sively in their cars and that the others are getting 
ready to do so as fast as they can. You are also 
doubtless aware of the fact that so great has been the 
success of this engine that premiums are being paid 
by purchasers for the privilege of getting cars equip¬ 
ped with it, a thing unknown in the European motor 


167 


industry for several years, and that the Daimler Mo¬ 
tor Company within the past sixty days has increased 
its prices for all models because of the tremendous 
demands for cars with Knight engines, and its inabil¬ 
ity to take care of the business offered. It must either 
be that these veteran leaders of the automobile world 
are crazy and the discriminating buyers are the same, 
or else they, like myself, have not yet learned of the 
great merit of the Packard engine. 

You make certain statements concerning the 
Knight engine which has been in your hands, which 
we, of course, have no means of verifying, but which 
I am frank to tell you we cannot accept on your ex 
parte statement. You have also made statements re¬ 
garding objectionable features which you say are 
possessed by the Knight motor, but which have been 
eliminated from the Packard motor. 

This raises squarely the issue as to the compara¬ 
tive merits of the Knight and Packard engines, con¬ 
cerning which I should not expect you to accept my 
views, nor can I accept yours without a practical 
demonstration. 

As you express yourself as being hopeful that 
you may be able in the future to see the value of the 
Knight engine through the same ‘‘rose-colored 
glasses” as ourselves, a comparative test may enable 
one of us to get our glasses properly focused, and in¬ 
cidentally also give the motor industry generally, 
both manufacturers and buyers, some valuable light 
on this interesting subject. 

The Challenge. 

I, therefore, propose on behalf of Knight & Kil- 
bourne that a test under the most rigid supervision of 


some disinterested and well-known club or society of 
engineers be carried out along the lines of the test to 
which two Daimler-Knight engines were subjected 
under the auspices of the Royal Automobile Club 
of Great Britain and Ireland in March, 1909, which re¬ 
sulted in the Daimler Motor Company being awarded 
the Dewar Trophy for the most meritorious perform¬ 
ance of that year in the automobile world. 

I suggest that this test take place as soon as pos¬ 
sible at some suitable place in the United States to be 
agreed upon when it will be convenient for Mr. 
Knight, who is now abroad, to be present. 

Your large motor, if I am correctly informed, is 
5 X5U2", being 40 H. P., according to the A. L. A. M. 
rating. We have a motor of nearly this size, 
4% x 5^", being 38.4 PI. P. according to the A. L. 
A. M. rating. I propose that we submit three of our 
motors of this size to a comparative test with three 
of vour 40 H. P. motors in accordance with the fol¬ 
lowing conditions: 

o 

Conditions of Challenge. 

1. That the six engines shall be tested on the 
bench for a period of 132 hours continuous running. 

2. That the horse power given off shall at no 
time during the test fall below the A. L. A. M. rating 
multiplied by 1.3, the piston speed to be 1,000' per 
minute. If a higher piston speed is used, the mini 
mum horse power to be given off by the engine shall 

be increased proportionately. 

3. That the water temperature of the inlet shall 

be kept at 125 0 Fahrenheit during the test. 

4. That upon completion of the bench test, the 
engines, without any of their vital parts being dis- 


169 


turbed, shall be installed in standard touring cars and 
run for a distance of two thousand miles each on the 
Indianapolis track, this distance to be completed in 
not more than fifty hours running time. That the 
touring cars in which the engines are installed for this 
track test shall be as nearly as possible alike in weight, 
size of wheel, gear ratio, etc., so as to provide similar 
conditions for all the engines. 

5. That upon completion of the track test, the 
engines shall be again placed upon the bench and run 
for five hours under the same conditions as the pre¬ 
vious bench test referred to in paragraphs one, two 
and three. 

6. That the six engines from the commence¬ 
ment to the finish of the test shall be under the direct 
observation both day and night at all times of un¬ 
biased observers appointed by some club or engineer¬ 
ing society to be mutually agreed upon, or failing 
such agreement by a joint committee of five mem¬ 
bers; two to be appointed by Knight & Kilbourne and 
two by the Packard Motor Car Company, and the 
fifth by the four thus chosen. That representatives of 
both Knight & Kilbourne and the Packard Motor Car 
Company be permitted to be present at all times to 
give direction and assistance in carrying out the test 
of their respective engines, and that they also be per¬ 
mitted in each of the cars during the track tests. 

7. That during the bench test readings be taken 
of each of the engines not less than once every half hour 
of the horse power at the entered speed, which I sug¬ 
gest be twelve hundred revolutions per minute. This 
will give a piston speed of 1,100' per minute for your 
engine, and 1,025' per minute for the Knight engine. 


170 


On this basis, your engine would have to develop at 
all times not less than 57.2 H. P. and the Knight en¬ 
gine 51.17 PI. P. 

8. An accurate record shall be kept of the fuel 
consumption per horse power on the bench and also 
of the cars on the track and the same grade of gaso¬ 
line shall be used by all of the engines. 

9. An accurate record shall be kept of the con¬ 
sumption per horse power of lubricating oil by each 
of the engines, and also by each of the cars during the 
track test. 

10. A11 accurate record shall be kept and read¬ 
ings made at the same time as the horse power read¬ 
ings are taken of the temperature of the circulating 
water at the intake and exhaust for each of the en¬ 
gines under test. 

11. A record of repairs or adjustments, if any, 
the following, however, while they shall be recorded 
and included in the certificates to be issued by the 
Judges, will not debar the engines from continuing 
the test. 

Defects of — 

Gasolene supply. 

Water circulation. 

Ignition system. 

Exhaust piping. 

Brake system. 

The time for all necessary repairs and their na¬ 
ture and any replacements shall be noted and the en¬ 
gines shall be called upon to make good such time as 
is thus lost under the general conditions governing 

the test. 



12. At the conclusion of the test of each engine 
it shall be completely dismantled and the Judges shall 
make a careful examination of all of the parts for the 
purpose of ascertaining their condition and amount of 
wear shown. If any of the engines are so far destroy¬ 
ed as to be unable to complete the test, an accurate 
record shall be made of such fact, and the cause or 
causes thereof, so far as possible, with the list of the 
parts broken or damaged, and the extent of such 
break or damage. 

13. The record of the track tests shall disclose 
the number of miles traveled, the average speed per 
hour, total weight carried, number of gallons of gaso¬ 
line used, distance per mile in gallons, number of ton 
miles per gallon, number of stops and reasons for 
same, together with their duration and a general 
statement of the running qualities of the engines so 
far as quietness, freedom from vibration, etc., are con¬ 
cerned. 

14. At the conclusion of the final five hours 
bench test, one Knight and one Packard engine shall 
be run for periods of ten minutes each pulling the 
maximum load they will pull at speed, rising by 100 
revolutions per minute each from 400 to 1,800 revolu¬ 
tions per minute to give the comparative power of the 
two motors at a wide range of speeds. The final test 
to be made without any adjustments or disturbance 
of the engine or any of its accessories. This will 
demonstrate whether the two engines are ordinary or 
special engines, and whether flexibility and other im¬ 
portant features have been sacrificed for the purpose 
of securing power at a fixed speed. 

15. The entire test shall be open to the repre¬ 
sentatives of the daily and technical press, to whom 


1/2 


the fullest information shall at all times be given by 

o j 

the Judges as to the progress of the tests. 

16. As considerable expense will be involved in 
such a test for the payment of Judges and observers 
and other incidental expenses, I suggest that each 
contestant deposit $5,000 with the Judges to be used 
in defraying such expenses with an agreement that if 
any balance is left of the amount so deposited it shall 
be turned over to the contestant who shall be awarded 
a certificate by the Judges for the best all around per¬ 
formance in the test. 

I have suggested three engines, thinking you 
may prefer to have that number in case of any un¬ 
foreseen accident to which any engine is liable, but 
if you prefer a less number we shall be pleased to meet 
your wishes in that regard. 

With reference to running without water and oil, 
I regard this as a wholly unfair test to any engine, be¬ 
cause it is not a condition to which any engine, in the 
hands of a user of ordinary prudence and common 
sense, is ever likely to be subjected. However, if you 
■wish to carry out such a test, we are willing to meet 
you, and in that event I suggest upon completion of 
the final bench test, one of the Packard engines and 
one of the Knight engines be again installed in tour- 
in 0 ' cars the water removed from the radiators and 
engines, the lubricating oil drained from the bases 
and the two cars run on the track on dii ect speed at 
20 miles per hour until one of them stops, after which 
a careful examination shall be made of the condition 

* of both engines. 

If there are any conditions which I ha\ e named 
which do not seem fair to you, I shall be pleased to 
have an expression of your views as to a modification 


173 


and will be ready to meet you on any reasonable basis 
for such a test. 

As you have expressed the opinion that your en¬ 
gine is free from many objectionable features which 
you assert the Knight engine has, I take it for granted 
you will be glad to enter upon such a contest as I have 
suggested for the purpose of verifying your opinion 
and claim. 

Trusting I may have the pleasure of receiving a 
prompt acceptance of this challenge from the Pack¬ 
ard Motor Car Company, and suggesting a time and 
place for meeting to arrange details, I am, 

Very truly yours, 

(Signed) F. E. LONAS. 


DRIVING NOTES. 

The following useful hints and tips will no doubt 
be found useful to those who are owners or drivers 
and will show those who can already drive how to ob¬ 
tain best results from his car. Owing to the concave 
depression in the detachable heads of this motor 
water will remain in them after the rest has been 
drained out of the motor and radiator as this space is 
below the outlet pipe. Consequently if the car is to 
be left standing in winter time where it will freeze up 
this water must be removed. Almost anv oil or grease 
gum may be used for this purpose. Unless a strong 
anti-freezing solution is used this is a very important 
point to observe. Otherwise the freezing of the water 
in these heads would crack them and necessitate ex¬ 
pensive repairs. 


174 


Starting the Engine. 

If the gauge shows that there is no pressure in 
the gasoline tank, close the tap on the pressure pump 
and work the latter till the gauge registers 2 lbs. pres¬ 
sure. Turn on the petrol tap, flood the carburetter 
slightly, switch on the accumulator ignition, give the 
starting handle two or three turns, and the engine 
should start. The throttle lever should onlv be ad- 
vanced about one inch from the “closed" position and 
the ignition lever should be similarly placed. When 
the engine has started, the magneto ignition should 
be switched on instead of the accumulator. If it is 
desired to start on the magneto, the ignition lever on 
the wheel should be fully advanced. 

Starting the Car. 

The car can always be started on second speed, 
except when on a steep hill. The engine should not 
be raced excessively at starting; it will be found that 
the clutch may be let right in when the engine is run¬ 
ning comparatively slowly. As soon as the car is 
under way, top gear should be engaged, and, after 
this, it will be found that the, full variation in speed, 
whether on the level or up hill, can be obtained simply 
by opening or closing the throttle. 

Running the Car. 

The best rule to follow with regard to the control 
levers is to keep the throttle closed as much as pos¬ 
sible for the speed desired, to supply as much extra 
air as the engine will take, and to advance the ignition 
lever. For very slow running it is best to cut oft the 
extra air supply altogether, h or very fast running, 
full air, and full ignition advance must be used. When 


i75 


climbing hills at fast speed, it will usually be found best 
to pull the throttle lever back three or four notches, and 
also slightly to retard the ignition lever if the engine 
begins to labor. 

Gear Changing. 

When changing up from second speed to third* 
or from third to top, the throttle lever should be re¬ 
tarded, the clutch pedal depressed about half way, and 
the change speed lever moved quickly over to the cor¬ 
rect position. 

When changing down, the throttle lever should 
be left half-way advanced, the clutch slightly de¬ 
pressed, and the gear lever moved into neutral posi¬ 
tion. The clutch should then be let in for a moment, 
and immediately afterwards depressed, the gear lever 
being slipped into position simultaneously with the 
last clutch movement. 

Another method of changing down is to leave the 
throttle lever half advanced, to press gently on the 
clutch pedal till the clutch is only just free and then 
to pull the change speed lever right back into the- 
lower gear. For a quiet change with this method, it is 
essential that the clutch pedal should not be pressed 
forward more than about a quarter of an inch. 

Only when engaging a gear with the car at rest 
should the clutch pedal be pushed right forward. 

Brakes. 

The foot brakes should be used normally, the 
hand brake being reserved for emergencies and long 
descents. The engine should always be used as a 
brake by fully closing the throttle. The clutch should 


176 


not be disengaged until the car is being brought to a 
standstill. 

Hints to Drivers. 

(i.) The maxim for the careful driver is “Don’t 
take any risks.” If this is acted upon, there will not 
be much chance of accidents. 

(2.) Iveep a careful look out at all cross roads 
and when entering a main road. It is at these places 
that most of the serious accidents occur. 

(3.) Remember that the silence of the car 
makes the speed seem much less than it actually is. 
1 his fact should be carefully kept in mind and allow¬ 
ances made accordingly. 

O J 

(4.) Drive slowly round corners if you wish 
your tires to last long, and for the same reason avoid 
sudden application of the brakes, except in case of 
emergency. 

(5.) Always show consideration for other road, 
users, whether pedestrians, cyclists, or horse drivers. 
This consideration consists in (a) not trying to pass 
too closely, and (b) slowing down for a few moments 
when passing on a dusty or muddy day. 

(6.) Drive slowly on greasy surfaces and avoid 
sudden acceleration or application of the brakes. Use 
the engine as a brake, and avoid use of the clutch as 
much as possible. 

(7.) If a short patch of unrolled stone is en¬ 
countered, the best way to proceed is to approach it 
with just sufficient speed to enable the car to roll over 
the patch with the clutch disengaged. This is better 
for the tires than driving the car slowly over the patch. 
Above all. the car should not be stopped when on the 
stones, for the effort of starting might perhaps dam¬ 
age the rear tires. 


177 


Washing the Car. 


If the well-finished appearance of the car is to be 
maintained, carefnl washing is essential. It is advis¬ 
able to wash the car frequently, particularly when the 
car is new, and the washing must invariably take 
place at the end of the day’s run, before the mud has 
dried on the varnish. Cold water must be used and 
nothing else, for the addition of petrol, paraffin, or 
anything of this nature will cause the varnish to be¬ 
come dull quickly. The water should be sprayed on 
with a hose, but the pressure must be reduced con¬ 
siderably, otherwise the particles of mud will scratch 
the surface. When all the mud and dust has been 
washed off, the body may be wiped down with a wet 
sponge and afterwards dried with a clean chamois 
leather. 

Excess of water should not be used on the steer¬ 
ing arms or pivots, or else the lubricating oil may be 
washed out. 

If the leather upholstery is dirty, it may be 
washed with soap and water, and afterwards polished, 
if necessary, with leather reviver. 

The cushions should always be taken out of the 
car and dried after a run on a wet dav. 

J 

A French-polished surface should not be washed 
with soap and water; a drop of linseed oil will quickly 
restore its brilliancy. 

Hints on the Treatment of Bodies. 

(i.) Never bang a door to shut it; a properly 
fitted door shuts easily with a gentle slam. Continued 
banging will loose the hinges and so set up a rattle, 
while the paint is apt to chip and fall. 


178 


(2.) If a door rattles, the hinges should have 
the attention of a coachbuilder. The adjustment is 
simple and effective, whereas the common method of 
nailing a piece of leather along the door post will 
make matters much worse in the end. 

(3.) The car should not be left in the sun on a 
hot day unless this is unavoidable. The heat may 
cause the varnish to blister. 

(4.) The car must never be pushed along by 
placing the hands against the panels, or by pulling on 
the door handles or similar fitments. The correct 
method is to push the back of the frame or, easier still, 
to turn the wheels by pulling on the tires. 

To Lower a Landaulette Hood. 

(1.) Drop the inside curtain and fix it along the 
back pillar with the window. 

(2.) Undo the two fasteners on top of the hood. 
(3.) Raise the folding part of the roof straight 

up. 

(4.) Fold the near-side joint just enough to pass 
the center, and do the same on the other side. Do not 
attempt to fold the hood down first. 

(5.) From the back of the car pull the hood 

gently down. 

(6.) When the hood is folded, the back light 
should not hang on the back panel but must be folded 
inside, resting on the back squab. 

Hints on the Care of Tires. 

(T.) See that the tires are inflated up to the cor¬ 
rect pressure, and verify this by using a piessuie 
o-auee occasionally. The table given below shows the 

0 o J 

correct pressure for the various sizes. 


179 




(2.) The wing nuts and valve nut must be 
tightened up occasionally to prevent water getting in¬ 
side the tire. 

(3.) The small dust cap must always be fitted 
over the valve to ensure an airtight joint, and the rub¬ 
ber disc inside it must never be omitted. 

(4.) If the air slowly leaks out of a tube and no 
puncture is apparent, the hexagon nut which secures 
the valve to the tube may require tightening. 

(5.) The wheels should not be washed if the 
tires are deflated, otherwise water and grit will pene¬ 
trate to the inside of the tire. 

(6.) Tires which appear to be in good condition 
should be taken off and examined at least every 5,000 
miles. If the rims are rusted inside, they must be 
cleaned and painted. The cover must be well chalked 
before it is replaced. 

(7.) Great care must be taken to prevent oil 
coming in contact with the tires, for nothing is more 
injurious to the rubber. 

(8.) All covers carried on the car should be well 
protected by means of a waterproof wrapper and all 
tubes should be carried in a rubber bag containing a 
handful of chalk. 


Proper Inflation for Cord Tires. 


All 3^" Cord Tires 


44 


44 


4 4 


4 4 


4 " 

4/2" 

5 " 

5>V' 


4 4 


44 


4-4 

4 4 


4 4 


44 


49 lbs. 

56 “ 
63 “ 



180 







Proper Inflation for Fabric Tires. 


All 

3" 

Fabric 

hires. 

. 55 

lbs 

u 

3/2" 

4 4 

44 

. 60 

44 

4 i 

4 " 

i i 

4 4 

. 70 

u 

i t 

4/2" 

44 

4 4 

. 80 

44 

44 

- " 

44 

4 4 


4 4 


5 



. 90 


i i 

5/2" 

4 4 

4 4 

.100 

44 

4 4 

6" 

4 4 

44 

.110 

44 


TROUBLES AND THEIR LOCATION. 

As was stated at the commencement of this book, 
troubles with the engine or other parts of the car are 
not matters of frequent occurrence; on the contrary, 
a whole season may pass without recourse ever hav¬ 
ing to be made to the directions given below. 

When, however, any unusual symptom is appar¬ 
ent, either by some noise or by a falling off in the 
power of the engine, the circumstances should be 
noted, and, by reference to the following table, the 
reason can be at once determined. 

All possible causes of the given trouble are 
stated, but a small amount of general experience 
should enable the operator to choose the one appro¬ 
priate to his case. 

Trouble. Engine Will Not Start— 

Cause. (i.) Carburation. 

(2.) Ignition. 

Remedy. (t.) Flood carburettor to make sure that 

the gasoline is flowing properly. If 
mixture “weak” (probable in cold 
weather or when first starting), 
inject a little gasoline in the cocks on 









the inlet pipes. If mixture “rich” 
(possible in hot weather or when 
the engine is hot after a run), open 
cocks on inlet pipes if necessary. 

(2.) Examine the sparking plugs for 
water or oil on the points. Exam¬ 
ine accumulator and switch; see if 
wiring terminals disconnected or 
loose; see if trembler blade stuck. 
Try if the engine will start on the 
magneto, having first advanced the 
ignition lever. 

Trouble. Engine Starts but Will Not Continue to 

Run— 


Cause. 

(i.) 

Accumulator run down. 


(2.) 

Gasoline not flowing freelv to car- 

0 

burettor. 

Remedy. 

(i.) 

Try the other accumulator or switch 
on to magneto. 


( 2 -) 

See if tap turned on fully; see if 
gauge shows correct pressure at 
tank; see if dirt in float chamber 
or pipes. 

Trouble. 

Engine Will Not Run Fast— 

Cause. 

(1.) 

Accumulator weak. 


U) 

Ignition retarded. 


( 3 -) 

Magneto requires adjustment. 


( 4 -) 

Silencer choked. 

Remedy. 

(i.) 

Recharge the accumulator. 


(2.) 

See if ignition lever works the dis¬ 
tributor correctly. 


( 3 -) 

Adjust contact breaker. 


( 4 .) 

Remove silencer and clean the tubes- 


Trouble. Engine Stops Suddenly— 

Cause. Ignition failure. 

Remedy. Examine the wiring from magneto 

or accumulator to the switch and 
to the frame. 


Trouble. Engine Will Not Stop When Switched 

Off— 


Cause. 


Remedy. 


(i.) If firing is regular, switch defective 
or wire disconnected. 

(2.) If firing is irregular, pre-ignition. 
(1.) To stop the engine, shut the throttle 
or turn off the gasoline; then exam¬ 
ine switch and wiring. 

(2.) Clean plugs; if necessary, clean 
burnt oil from cylinders by re¬ 
moving the heads. 


Trouble. Engine Misfires Regularly in One 

Cylinder— 

Cause. Plug defective wire loose or short 

circuited; asbestos washer on in¬ 
let pipe broken (unlikely). 

Remedy. Change plug; examine wiring; fit 

new washer. 


Trouble. 

Cause. (i.) 

( 2 -) 

Remedy. (i.) 



Engine Misfires Irregularly— 

Ignition. 

Carburettor. 

Examine contact breaker, distribu¬ 
tor, wiring, switch, plugs, accumu¬ 
lator. 

See if there is any dirt or water in 
the float or jet chamber; see that 
the gasoline is flowing properly. 


183 



Trouble. Engine Fires in Silencer— 

Cause. Unbred charges passing through 

the engine. 

Remedy. Examine as in last section; particu¬ 

larly see if the plug points are too 
far apart. 


Trouble. Engine “Popps” or Fires Back Into 

Carburettor— 


Cause. 

(1.) 

Mixture too weak. 


(2.) 

Ignition occurring at wrong time. 

Remedy. 

(i.) 

Lease extra air shut; examine pres¬ 
sure and fuel Supply; see if there 
is any dirt or water in the carburet¬ 
tor; see if the inlet pipe joints are 
loose. 


(2.) 

Look for short circuits in distribu¬ 
tor. 

Trouble. 

Engine Does Not “Pull” Well— 

Cause. 

(i.) 

Ignition or carburettor faulty. 


( 2 -) 

Engine short of oil. 


( 3 -) 

Silencer may be choked with burnt 
oil. 


(4.) 

Brakes may be dragging—indicated 
by the drums becoming hot. 


( 5 -) 

If in winter, the engine may be too 
cold. 

Remedy. 

(i-) 

As before. 


(2.) 

See if pump working properly, and 
if there is sufficient oil in base. 


( 3 -) 

Clean out the burnt oil. 


( 4 -) 

Adjust the brakes. 


184 


( 5 -) Remove fan belt; replace this when 
the warm weather comes. 


Trouble. 

Engine Overheats (indicated by water boil- 



ing in radiator)— 

Cause. 

(1.) 

Ignition too much retarded. 


(2.) 

Want of water. 


( 3 -) 

Circulation defective. 

- 

( 4 .) 

Fan not working. 


( 5 -) 

Pump not working. 


(6.) 

Engine short of oil. 

Remedy. 

C 1 -) 

Drive with ignition lever fully ad¬ 



vanced. 


(2.) 

Refill the radiator after the engine 



has cooled down somewhat. 


( 3 -) 

Clean pipes out with soda. 


(40 

Adjust fan belt. 


( 5 -) 

See if pump-driving cotter is in place. 


(6.) 

Put oil in base chamber; pour a little 


through the taps on the inlet pipe. 


Trouble. Engine Makes Unusual Hissing Noise— 

Cause. Leakage of gas from cylinder or 

pipes. 

Remedy. See if sparking plug broken; if in¬ 

let or exhaust pipes loose; or their 
washers blown out ; see if taps on 
inlet pipe open. 

Trouble. Engine Makes Knocking Noise— 


Cause. 

(i.) 

Pre-ignition. 


(2.) 

Loose bearings. 

Remedy. 

(i.) 

Retard spark. If knock still con 


tinues change the plugs one at a 


185 






Trouble. 

Cause. 

Remedy. 


Trouble. 

Cause. 


time. If necessary, clean burnt 
oil out of cylinders. 

(2.) This should not occur till after a 
long period of running. 

Engine Runs Well But Will Not Drive 
Car- 

Clutch slipping. 

See if clutch pedal is fouling the 
foot-board; increase tension on 
spring; pour a little gasoline on 
leather; as a last resource apply 
Fuller's earth or resin to the lea¬ 
ther. 

Unusual Noise in Transmission Gear— 

(1.) If a humming noise, the gear box or 
rear axle is probably short of 
grease or oil, or one of the bearings 
requires lubrication. 

(2.) If a tapping or knocking noise, some- 
part loose. 

(2.) Locate the source of the trouble by 
noting its frequency relative to the 
rate of revolution of the rear wheel, 
or to that of the propellor shaft 
(the rate of the latter being ap¬ 
proximately three or four times 
that of the rear wheels). When 
the source is located, jack up the 
wheels and examine the parts for 
undue play or looseness. If the 
trouble is in the propellor shaft, 
examine the universal joints and. 
the gear box brake. 


TO LOCATE A MISFIRING CYLINDER. 

If the engine is misfiring regularly in one or 
more cylinders, the source of trouble may be located 
by cautiously touching the separate exhaust pipes in 
turn. Those pipes which lead from the defective cyl¬ 
inders should be cooler than the others. Another 
method is to short-circuit the plugs of each cylinder 
in turn, while the engine is running. To do this, a 
wooden-handled screwdriver should be held so that 
the metal blade is in contact with the cylinder head 
and with the terminal of the plug. If the cylinder 
which is being tested is firing correctly, this short- 
circuiting of the plug will reduce the speed of the en¬ 
gine. When the misfiring cylinder is reached, no 
reduction in the engine speed will be noted. 

UNUSUAL NOISES. 

On account of the multitude of moving parts on a 
car, slight squeaks or noises are sometimes set up. 
Owing to the exceptional silence of running of Knight 
engined cars, these slight noises are specially notice¬ 
able, and hence a few words on their location may be 
useful. If the squeak is regular in occurrence, it must 
be caused by some revolving part. By running the 
engine with the car at rest, it can be determined 
whether the trouble is in this part or not. If not in the 
engine, the squeak is probably in the clutch mechan¬ 
ism or in one of the universal joints, or perhaps the 
brakes are rubbing slightly on their drums. A few 
minutes with the oil can will put these matters right. 
If the squeak is intermittent, the springs and spring 
shackles should be examined and lubricated. When 
the squeak is specially noticeable on rough roads it is 
almost certain to be caused by one of these parts. 


187 


USEFUL TABLES 


MILLIMETRES AND INCHES. 


Mm. 

Inches. 

Mm. 

Inches. 

■ 

Mm. 

Inches. 

1 

Mm. ; 

I 

Inches. 

1 

0-0394 

26 

1 0236 

51 

2-0079 

76 j 

2 -9922 

2 

0-0787 

27 

1-0630 

52 

2 0473 

77 | 

3-0315 

3 

01181 

28 

1 1024 

53 

2-0866 

78 ' 

3-0709 

4 

0-1575 

29 

11417 

54 

2-1260 

79- , 

3 1103 

5 

0-1968 

30 

11811 

55 

2-1654 

80 

3-1496 

6 

0-2362 

31 

1-2205 

56 

2-2047 

81 

3-1890 

7 

0-2756 

32 

1-2598 

57 

2-2441 

82 , 

3-2284 

8 

0-3150 

33 

1-2992 

58 

2-2835 

83 

.3-2677 

9 

0-3543 

34 

1-3386 ; 

59 

2-3228 

84 i 

3-3071 

10 

0-3937 

35 

1-3780 

60 

2-3622 

85 , 

3-3465 

11 

0-4331 

36 

1-4173 

61 

2-4016 

86 

3-3859 

12 

0-4724 

37 

1-4567 i 

62 

2-4410 

j 87 

3-4252 

13 

0-5118 

38 

1-4961 

63 

2-4803 

88 

3-4646 

14 

0-5512 

39 

1-5354 

64 

2-5197 

89 

3-5040 

15 

0-5906 

40 

1 5748 

65 

2-5591 

90 

3-5433 

16 

0-6299 

41 

1-6142 

66 

2 5984 

91; I 

3-5827 

17 

0-6693 

42 

1-65S6 

67 

2-6378 

! 02' 

3-6221 

18 

0-7087 

43 

1-6929 

68- 

2-6772 

93 | 

3-6614 

19 

0-7480 

44 

1-7323 

69 

2-7166 

94 

3-7008 

20 

0-7874 

45 

1-7717 

[ 70 

2-7559 

j 95 

3-7402 

21 

0-8268 

46 

1 -8110 

71 

2-7953 

j 06 

3-7796 

90 

w 

0-8661 

47 

1-8504 

72 

2-8347 

97 

3-8189 

23 

0-9055 

48 

1-8898 

73 

2-8740 

98 

3-8583 

24 

0-9449 

49 

1-9291 

74 

2-9134 

99 

3-8977 

25 

0-9843 

50 

1-9685 

1 

75 

2-9528 

! 100 | 

3-9370 


INCHES AND MILLIMETRES. 


Inches. 

0 

0 

0.0 

i 

rs 

1.6 

i i 

8 1 

3.2 

a 

16 

4.8 

i 

i 

6.4 

fk 

7.9 

3 

8 

9.5 

7 

TR 

11.1 

1 

25.4 

27.0 

28.6 

30.2 

31.7 

33.3 

34.9 

36.5 

2 

50.8 

52.4 

54.0 

55.6 

57.1 

58.7 

60.3 

61.9 

3 

76.2 

77.8 

79.4 

81.0 

82.5 

84.1 

85.7 

87.3 

4 

101.6 

103.2 

104.8 

106.4 

108.0 

109.5 

111.1 

112.7 

5 

127.0 

128.6 

130.2 

131.8 

133.4 

134.9 

136.5 

138.1 

6 

152.4 

154.0 

155.6 

157.2 

158.8 

160.3 

16191 

163.5 

Inches. 

0 

1 

"•> 

12.7 

A 

14.3 

5 I 
8 

15.9 

UL 

16 

17.5 

5 

19.1 

13 

lfi 

20.6 

i 

22.2 

i 

16 

23.8 

1 

38.1 

39.7 

41.3 

42.9 

44.4 

46.0 

47.6 

49.2 

2 

63.5 

65.1 

66.7 

68.3 

69.8 

71.4 

73.0 

74.6 

3 

88.9 

90.5 

92.1 

93.7 

95.2 

96.8 

98.4 

100.0 

4 

114.3 

115.9 

117.5 

119.1 

120.7 

122.2 

123.8 

125.4 

5 

139.7 

141.3 

142.9 

144.5 

146.1 

147.6 

149.2 

150.8 

6 

165.1 

166.7 

168.3 

169.9 

171.5 

173.0 

174.6 

176.2 




























MILES AND KILOMETRES. 


Kilo.. 

Miles. 

Kilo. 

Miles. 

r~ 

g 

cT 

Miles. 

Kilo. 

Miles. 

1 

5 

8 

20 

12g 

38 

23| 

50 

34? 

2 


21 

13 

39 

241 

57 

353 

3 

n 

22 

13| 

40 

241 

58 

36 

4 

2b 

23 

141 

41 

25 b 

59 

36| 

5 

3 * 

3? 

24 

HI 

42 

261 

60 

371 

6 

25 

15 b 

43 

26* 

70 

43 h 

7 


26 

161 

44 

27f 

80 

49? 

8 

5 

27 

I64 

45 

28 

90 

551 

9 

5f 

28 

17| 

46 

28f 

100 

62 k 

10 

6? 

29 

18 

47 

291 

200 

124? 

11 

6| 

30 

18| 

48 

291 

300 

186| 

12 

u 

31 

191 

49 

30* 

400 

248* 

13 

H 

32 

m 

50 

34 

500 

310? 

14 

8f 

33 

201 

51 

31 1 

600 

3721 

15 

9| 

34 

21 8 

52 

321 

700 

435 

16 

10 

35 

211 

53 

321 

800 

4971 

17 

lOf- 

36. 

22 § 

51 

331 

900 

559] 

18 

iii 

37 

23 

55 

341 

1000 

621* 

19 

ni 








CONVERSION OF METRIC INTO 
.ENGLISH MEASURE. 


1 millimetre is approximately inch and is exactly 03937 inch 
1 centimetre is approximately inch and is exactly -3937 inch. 

1 metre is approximately 39] inches and is exactly 1 0930 yards 
1 kilometre is approxipiately § mile and is exactly- -0213 mile. 

1 kilogramme is approximately 2] lbs. and is exactly 2 21 lbs. 

1 litre is approximately 1? pints and is exactly 170 pints. 


To convert metres to yards, multiply by 70 and divide by 01. 
To convert kilometres to miles, multiply by 5 and divide by 

(approx.). -- 

To convert litres to pints, multiply by SS and divide by 50. 

To convert grams to ounces, multiply by 507 and divide by 20 


To find the cubical < «.n tents of a motor cylinder, square tin 
diameter (or bore) multipK by 0-7854 and multiply the result 0v tin 

strobe. 


189 






































SPEED TABLE. 


Time 

of 

One Mile. 

Miles 

per 

Hour. 

i 

Time 
of . 
One Mile. 

Miles 

per 

Hour. 

Time 

of 

One Mile. 

Miles 

per 

Hour. 

Min 

Sec. 


! 

1 Min 

Sec. 


1 - 

Min. 

Sec. 


0 

40 

90 

! i 

22 

43-9 

2 

12 

27-3 

0 

41 

87*18 

i 

23 

43-3 

2 

15 

26-7 

0 

42 

85-6 

i 

24 

42-8 

2 

18 

26-1 

0 

43 

83-8 

i 

25 

42 -4 

2 

21 

25-5 

0 

44 

81-8 

i 

26 

41 9 

2 

24 

25 

0 

45 

80 

i 

27 

41 -4 

2 

27 

24-5 

0 

46 

'78-2 

i 

28 

40-9 

2 

30 

24 

0 

47 

76-6 

i 

29 

40 4 

2 

33 

23-6 

0 

48 

75 

i 

30 

40 

2 

36 

23-1 

0 

49 

73-4 

i 

31 • 

39-6 

2 

39 

22-6 

0 

50 

72 

i 

32 

39-1 

2 

42 

22-2 

0 

51 

70-6 

i 

33 

38-7 

2 

45 

21-8 

0 

52 

69*2 

i 

34 

38-3 

2 

48 

21-4 

0 

53 

68 

i 

35 

37-9 

2 

51 

21-1 

0 

54 

66-8 

i 

36 

37-5 

2: 

54 

$0;7‘ 

0 

55 

65-4 

i 

37 

37*1 

2 

57 

20-3 

0 

56 

64-2 

i 

38 

36*7 

3 

0 

20 

0 

57 

63-2 

i 

39 

36-4 

3 

6 

19*4 

0 

58 

62 

i 

40 

36 

3 

12 

18-8 

0 

59 

61 

i 

41 

35-7 

3 

18 

18-2 

1 

0 

60 

i 

42 

35-3 

3 

24 

17 *7 

1 

1 

59 

i 

43 

34-9 

3 

30 

17 1 

1 

2 

58 

i 

44 

34 6 

3 

36 

16 7 

1 

3 

57 1 

i 

45 

34-3 

3 

42 

16-2 

1 

4 

56-3 

i 

46 

34 

3 

48 

15-7 

1 

5 ' 

55-4 

i 

47 

33-7 

3 

54 ‘ 

15-4 

1 

6 

54-5 

i 

48 

33 4 

4 

0 

15 

1 

7 

53-7 

i 

49 

33 

4 

6 

14-6 

1 

8 

53 

i 

50 

32-7 

4 

12 

14-3 

l 

9 

52-2 

i 

51 

32-4 

4 

18 

.13-9 

1 

10 

51-4 

i 

52 

321 

4 

24 

13-6 

1 

11 

50 7 

i 

53 

31-8 

4 

30 

13-3 

1 

12 

50 

i 

54 

31-6 

4 

36 

13 

l 

13 

49-4 

i 

55 

» 31*3 

4 

42 

12 8 

1 

14 

48-6 

i 

56 

31 

4 

48 

12-5 

1 

15 

48 

i 

57 

30-8 

4 

54 

12 2 

1 

16 

47-4 

i 

58 

30-5 

5 

-0 

12 

1 

17 

46-7 

i 

59 

30-2 

5 

12 

11-5 

1 

18 

46-2 

o 

0 

30 

5 

24 

11-1 

1 

19 

45-6 

2 

3 

29-2 

5 

36 

10-7 

l 

20 

45 

9 

As 

6 

28-6 ! 

5 

48 

10-3 

1 

21 

44-4 

2 

9 

27-9 

St 

6 

0 

10 


































PERSONAL MEMORANDA. 




Name . 
Address 


Nearest Rly. Stn. 

Telegraphic Address . 

Telephone Number. 

MOTOR MEMORANDA. 

Date of Purchase. 

Car No. 

Registration Number. 

Motor Driver's License Number. 


i 


VJ 1 5 4 


























* ^ °* 

» ( 0 ^ ♦ L ' * * ^O 

* * C° ,CW» o J 

*. ^o* •*-<* » 

a © 




» ^ 

o 

* 4/ « 

^ ■» <L V * 

+ 7*** * AV ~ 

\ » ^_> ' # * 





* *7 




© « 0 


av 

A *° ^ 

^p c* * 

^V* •SSgS£ 0 &» V * 1 

a** o 

^ '«.** A <, + v*XT* ^ -o.*- 

O_ * & j 0 “ ® « <£ A ^q> * w ; * 4 *& c 0 w ® ♦ v 

• ,r^xv *r f, 7 ^nOv-, 1 O s& 4 ^ 



y : / • 

K° 4? 'V ’. 



<r r/Tj. G * 


<j 5 ^ *%sycx 0 ^ 0v ^ 

,♦ jy o o ^ 

^ <# °^ **" o ° v 
!.•«- > v ;«L^* c* < 0 ^ ^' , *°^ 




A V ^U : 

" * X V V\ o 

4 A V ^ ^ , 

* ^ <A *V 

<^ v c o-o * <s> 

■* ''i jv / *P 

, ° *n <, .^S^AV^* v’ 



4 0- V 


>° 4° ^ . 

< A °*t. " 0 a 9 ^ ^ *»<'’*’ ^ 

v* >■;;'. c' ,o v *’•»» > v s *•" 

* : 

a.V»* - ' ~ 

" •» a > ^ * 

<£» • 4 ^ ^ 

o, '« • * * A <4 v 'T'r« 4 <0 V ^ 'o'. A * <v <4 

9 ^o c 0 « 0 , ^ # L * a <£* 0 - o ^ 

^_,a 'VSP^*. ^ oV'mV" " 




V » 

<> ^ °. 



o^ 'o.o* VV° 

^ . o ( 

*Po *■ 

* ,& * 

: 


* aV*> -* 

♦ ^ ^ •. 




O v 

^ o \p V*> - ^///mx^jp JO 

o* r»0 ^ ^ 

A° V "’' / 
.0 .’*•. *> v % s 

-4 A «, / 







^0^ 




V' . vLX.% C> 




^ ^ o 
•k <y> o 

> -<? 4 V <£■ * 

4 <G^ 'O. A 

.<y . • 1 ' *« c> a^ v & 0 1 0 * 0 s * •*•'*-* 

C ^ ^ C u v^/>^ ■* 




^ t -Ax«y, ^ 

<xy 

^ ''*• A r 




" o »o° .0’ 

^ V » S V’v' v c>, 4 <5~ a < * O, 

*• ^ «♦ ^ / 


V^ V 



/“ /\ 

v>, -O.A* 4 A < k ^ '-'.«S 

•/ °o ,-J.^ .'U°” : “-- ^ ,o v - 0 

^ ^ .‘«^*. "W -o/ « 



4° ^ 

0 ° ^ v— 


^ Vj ^ ®W^ * 

* ^ V , % ''°- i '\0 ^ ''-.o' . 

♦Vrt^,*-. ° ,*^Sw. ■%■ o u 








'*2 


X * 
X * 






* * X' X **xr > v x *-• 

’ + <P*Sj£l. °o A*A^’X ,6* ..“"* ^o 

: X 0 < .*5flj^. .v^iv. ,. c t*Mx. ° 


” *° ’’V. . 

y ., % . 0 ° v ' ; 

V > N*> <;• . >v . * •» «'■ 




^ A 0 A 

* TjN * 


‘ * 

* 7 

^ v . •* * <L 

A* <> v - f ..« < ^(y 

< 4 y <£ 

A *> * f-<S^r v *> '*J J y* ’ 



A* * »S ^ '■* 

<v X *© ♦ * * A 

<r ^ ,0^ ^ 6 J^* *X 



o V 





o *0 *7*» * * 

a, * '-tys/iutf a a " r.^ii\\\<s> * v X * ‘^yy/l\\^& * .<i* 

^ *•<’** A 4- ^b*. **»„»“* Ap° ^ **.,■>•* 

* •*“ ' '* •‘-vv ^ - 

: * 



aVA 

;* X ^ 




__ 4 ? V, » 

<*“. *VW**,* * 

<x v A » e V. - . *«‘ <6 X '■'« 

^ v^w * , 0 * o, 

^ 7 .V^B\*. ■V. « c 4 **^- 0 

v*Cr * 


'o K 


.* >° ■%. v 

0 * ry) & , C ^ /V , * iX. 

f 3 _ *M_ * ' ' <V 



V AUdL'v A 0* V *> -*** 




Vy A 

«. .. . ' V 


* 4 0, * „ 

> r ** - ^ 

* A o . a 



• v* v . vt^C/* o A ,o k * ’ 


- ^ X • 

4 <^y d> 

, 4’ V> 4 1 1 * _ 'X k 

^ : 

^ <x *- 

V , t .. , *u 

* Cv ^ *■ 
r vP £p * 

e V/ZWWNJ' * aVX 

>, 0 VJ 5 &AK* at x 

- O 0 .-^ ,0^ ( « ^ ‘ -. -O 

0 ,tn^NS ^\ 1 lx "8> X ^ ^/g K \\//^ ^ > ^ 0> v'V- 

• cr * o v 

* -a5 ^ ° sP x* *■ 

^ * ' / 1 ’ 4^> °,p * • «• * 5 A° ' ^{> * • • *» • , 

* *_* y , * 0 . « 1 * a - * 4> 


NX. 


o 




°, %■<& » 

• AV » 

% &, * 



^ 4 ^o K 


^7 



y 'X. .X U 

* ^ * 

- % cy 

* - 

/ <y %• *. 

‘ * 0 ^ "o A *< 

y.V>^ t * Vt.* ♦ *0 6 am>i * 

o «• »p 



\0 v*i v 

► \ V * 

* 0 j, *- 

> rv-' <>* 

At ^ '' ’ <V •«!•» ai 

0 .«:•>, •> v % *'>*■> c\ o' .’•»- •■> 

o r$* A V * * Xn * 

* > ° ^ ^^ * 

« A> V 0rv o •* 

4 47 oXJSVk* aV X * 

<* ♦o ) 77‘ A '»• * * .<v ^ ‘-TT. ‘ ,0 

, v C 0* /a ;,^ : ,_y ,y .cj^ v % 






* C.*> ^ o 

** # S X ^ 
* * 


* T, 



?; 0 4 -‘ 

?,* 4I 0 * * 

l* y C>, ’ • „0 ^ 

4> *•«» a0 V *•<’■ a 




& ’a 

*£* 

O 

v O 

■* X 

/ ^ 

v' 

.V «■ A 

* u> G 

■ * >»v ^ A X>- o M/jssAk •* a^ , b\ # 

^ <a 'I- * % <y #<> * * * A <, *4 , 

•j^ .*«s^Sh 4 r» *v^ . c +w^«.’. 0 y • 

"b ^ ;■ 

♦ 




V 

” o 

u*. ^o ^ 

* A ^ ^ ‘ ^JUV 5 v ^ 

* A ,/<. *7 <cir^ % * aV C\ 0 

^0 J 4>- a ,,1 ‘ ^ 

<> .s♦♦ . ^ 



. •£• 0 s 

* , 4 ° 


<J. > 4 >* 





WERT 


Sept—Oct 1987' 

>e Quality Bound 



BOOKBINDING || 

Grintvi|le, Pa. M 

N^nt —On iti«7 H 


O. •'o . * 


o ip n% 

% 7 » 

j* rv) <$* ^ , * ft 1 ’ 

a° * # ■• <y 

v. .<y w **o* v A * 4< 

. \ A* .VV^* ^ 0P ♦*■' 

* <y A? 4J, *> B 

** GO *0 


<v 












